A. K. Yog, J.
1. Impugned order dated 28th February, 1997, passed by Deputy Director of Education (Secondary) on behalf of Director of Education. U. P., copy of which has been filed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition, directed Regional Joint Director of Education, U. P. not to apply and extend benefit of Government Order dated 10th December, 1973 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) for fixation of salary in the case of those Assistant Teachers in L.T. grade who were appointed on the ground of being 'retrenched employee' vide Director's letter dated 18th October, 1996. By means of this impugned order, Director of Education (Secondary), U. P. directed that earlier letter of the Directorate dated 18th October, 1996, shall be kept in abeyance and not given effect to.
2. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent, but there is no indication as to what has been done by the Director of Education after passing impugned order dated 28th February, 1997.
3. Learned standing counsel is not in a position to apprise the Court whether further order has been issued by the concerned authority or not. The Impugned order, which was apparently an interim order, was Issued on the ground that Government Order dated 10th December. 1973 (Annexurc-3 to the Writ Petition) was made for ad hoc appointees only. This reasoning is against record inasmuch as it is not borne out from perusal of the said Government Order dated 10th December, 1973. which shows that it specifically dealt with retrenched employees-otherwise also Director of Education (Secondary) U. P. is not competent to overrule Government Order.
4. This Court finds no Justification in treating a retrenched employee differently vis-a-vis so-called category of 'surplus employees' (Faltoo)-there being no discernible feature to classify them differently on any rationale or justification having support of law. Impugned order isclearly in violation of Article 14, Constitution of India.
5. Moreover, Director of Education cannot be allowed permanently to deprive 'retrenched employees' under impugned interim order, without passing final order.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn notice of this Court to Paragraph 15 of the Writ Pelition 9 (particularly page 11 of the Writ Paper Book) wherein reference has been made to Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 9080 of 1997, Pradeep Kumar Gupta v. Principal Secretary. Education, Government of U. P., Lucknow and others, wherein a learned single Judge passed an order on 14th March, 1997, which reads :
'The respondents are directed to show cause as to why they have withdrawn the order dated 28.2.1997 by filing an affidavit within four weeks from date.
Until further orders of this Court the operation of the impugned order dated 28.2.1997Annexure-24 shall remain stayed.
Sd/- S. L. Saraf, J.
7. In view of the fact that by passing interim order in case of certain other similarly situated Assistant Teachers, who have been virtually granted final relief by means of the interim order. I find no justification for denying the petitioner benefit of Government Order dated 10th December, 1973.
8. In the result, I quash the impugned order dated 28th February, 1997 and it is further directed that petitioner shall be given all benefits and paid arrears of salary, if any, ignoring Impugned order dated 28th February, 1997 within four months of submitting certified copy of this judgment before the concerned authorities. Petitioner shall be paid future salary month by month along with other staff of the college by fixing his salary on the basis of Government Order dated 10th February, 1973.
9. Writ petition stands allowed.
No order as to costs.