CW 838/95 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.838/1995 Agrawal Shiksha Samiti Versus State & Anr. Date of Order ::: 28/08/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. NK Maloo, for petitioner-Samiti Mr. Ganesh Meena, Government Advocate, for respondent Instant petition has been filed by Managing Committee, Agrawal Shiksha Samiti of Agrawal College with the grievance that State Government has refused to grant approval of subsequent selection made due to the post of Lecturer (Economics) having fallen vacant upon terminating services of earlier incumbent (Smt.Promila Verma) and despite the post being duly sanctioned & approved, the grand-in-aid against that post was withheld by State Government only on the premise of the dispute being pendente before High Court. Agrawal Shiksha Samiti is a society registered under Rajasthan Registration of Societies Act, running educational institution known as Agrawal College and it is receiving 80% grant-in-aid from State Government. It is not in dispute that post of Lecturer (Econ.) is duly sanctioned & approved by State Govt receiving grant-in-aid with regard to the post in question. After services of Smt. Promila CW 838/95 //2// Verma being terminated vide order dt.29/01/92 and finally confirmed by managing committee in its meeting held on 24/06/92, post of Lecturer (Econ.) became vacant for which after due advertisement, selections were made by petitioner-Samiti – in course whereof, one Shruti Bhardwaj was appointed vide order 15/09/93 as per recommendations made by the committee in its meeting held on 05/08/93 & 09/08/93, was sent for approval of State Government but was refused vide order dt. 30/05/94 (Ann.3) on the premise that dispute of Smt. Promila Verma is pending before the Court, it appears that Shruti Bhardwaj resigned on 5/03/94 and Ms.Kalpana Agrawal whose name appeared at S.No.2 in select list was appointed as Lecturer (Econ) vide order dt. 28/06/94 (Ann.5), which was also sent for approval of State Government but was refused vide order dt.12/08/94 (Ann.7) on the same premise that matter with regard to termination of services of Smt.Promila Verma is pending adjudication. However, as informed, letter dt. 27/06/96, State Government granted approval in regard to appointment given to Ms Kalpana Agrawal as Lecturer (Econ) subject to final outcome upon adjudication of dispute raised by CW 838/95 //3// Smt. Promila Verma. Only grievance raised herein is that thepost of Lecturer (Econ.) is approved and sanctioned by the Government on which Ms Kalpana Agrawal was appointed, after regular selection, respondents are under obligation to release grant-in-aid for the post in question, which could not have been withheld on the premise that dispute of earlier incumbent holding the post in question is pending adjudication or sub judice. In the reply, State Government raised only objection that because of dispute raised by Smt. Promila Verma pendente adjudication, approval could not have been granted and as regards selection of Ms Kalpana Agrawal, approval was later on granted as is evident from order dt.27/06/96. In view of letter of approval granted on 27/06/96, the controversy raised herein is no more survives as to whether respondent could refuse approval of selection made in accordance with scheme of Act, 1989, merely on the premise of dispute of earlier incumbent holding post in question being pendente adjudication. As regards grant-in-aid, if post has been duly sanctioned & approved by State CW 838/95 //4// Government, irrespective of the fate of pending dispute if raised by earlier incumbent that in no manner would preclude the petitioner seeking approval of its action and its grant-in-aid could not have been withheld, to which it is entitled for under law. As regards CWP-5504/2001 filed by Smt. Promila Verma against order of her termination from service, it has been dismissed by this Court vide separate order passed today. Thus, even the impediment having been recorded by respondents State Government while granting conditional approval vide order dt.27/06/96 stands deleted. With the observations (supra), writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.4/838CW95Aug28Rsr.doc