1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION  

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9054    OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.17189/2009)

VISHWA MOHINI                              Appellant(s)

                    :VERSUS:

DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS 2nd & ORS.    Respondent(s)

O R D E R

1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.  2. The appellant was appointed on ad hoc basis  

on the post of Assistant Teacher by the Management  

of  the  Adarsh  Balika  Higher  Secondary  School,  P.  

Road,  (Gandhi  Nagar)  Kanpur  Nagar,  U.P.  against  

leave vacancy.  Her appointment was not approved by  

the  District  Inspector  of  Schools  and  it  was  

communicated  to  the  management  vide  letter  dated  

15.10.1996 mentioning therein that if the appellant  

is allowed to continue in service, her salary will  

have to be paid by the management.  The appellant  

made a representation to the respondents upon which  

no action was taken.

2

3. The  appellant  thereafter  filed  a  writ  

petition  before  the  High  Court  of  Judicature  at  

Allahabad which was dismissed by the High Court. The  

learned Single Judge of High Court found that the  

appellant  was  appointed  for  a  short  term  by  the  

management  and  since  Smt.  Manju  Lata  Bajpai,  

Assistant  Teacher,  who  was  on  long  leave  had  

retired,  substantive  vacancy  occurred  and  against  

the substantive vacancy the management had no right  

to make short term appointment.  

4. The appellant preferred an appeal against the  

dismissal of the writ petition before the Division  

Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench upheld  

the order of the learned Single Judge and dismissed  

the appeal.

5. We  have  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

appellant  as  also  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

respondents.  

6. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of  

this  case,  we  are  of  the  considered  view  that  

interest of justice would meet if the appellant is

3

paid for the period she worked with the concerned  

school. Accordingly, we direct respondent Nos.1 to 4  

to pay the salary of the appellant for the period  

she worked, within eight weeks from today.  However,  

the District Inspector of Schools and the State of  

U.P. would be at liberty to recover that amount from  

the  management  of  the  school  or  from  any  other  

individual.   

7. The impugned order is accordingly set aside  

and  the  appeal  is  disposed  of  with  the  

aforementioned  observation  and  direction.  Parties  

are directed to bear their own costs.  

.....................J (DALVEER BHANDARI)

.....................J (DIPAK MISRA)

New Delhi; October 31, 2011.