Judgment:
R.A. Sharma, J.
1. Sri Sunil Kumar, respondent No. 3 here claiming to be son of the late of Rampal Sing alleged Principal of Munshi Gajadhar Singh Inter College, Komar Aligarh made an application for his appointment on compassionate ground due to death in harness of his father. The District Inspector of Schools not having acceded to his request, he filed a writ petition before this Court in which the learned Single Judge of this Court has passed the following interim order:-
'Issue notice.
Until further orders, the operation of the impugned/offer dated 28.6.1993 passed by respondent No. 2 (annexure-10 to the writ petition) shall remain stayed.
Respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to work as adhoc Principal of Munshi Gajadhar Singh Inter College, Komari, Aligarh, and to pay him salary for the post of Principal'.
2. Although Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 are not applicable to Intermediate Colleges but the Government of U.P. has issued an order for making such appointments to Class III and Class IV posts only if the employee of the institution has died in harness. Respondent No. 3 wanted to be appointed as Principal of the Intermediate College after the death of his father but no appointment can be made on the post of Principal on compassionate ground. Government order referred to above has permitted appointments on compassionate ground only to Class III and Class IV posts and not to the post of Principal of the college. That apart, appointments to the post of Principal of Intermediate College can only be made on the basis of selection of suitable candidates by Secondary Education Service Commission,
3. The learned Single Judge was as such not justified in passing the interim order directing the respondents to permit the respondent No. 3 to work as adhoc Principal of the College and to pay him the salary of the post of Principal.
4. It is not open to the Court to grant by way of interim order a relief which will be available at the time of disposal of the petition unless there are such special reasons to be recorded in the order itself.
5. The supreme Court in U.P. Junior Doctor's Action Committee v. Dr. B. Sheetal Nandwant, held, it is a well known rule of practice and procedure that the interlocutory sate of relief which is asked for and is available at the disposal of the matter is not granted unless there is any special reason to be indicated in clear term.
6. Following the above decision of the Supreme Court the Division Bench of this Court has reiterated the same principle. In this connection reference may be made to the decision in State of U.P. v. Smt. Dayawati Khanna decided on April 21, 1994 wherein it was laid down as under :-
' There is a settled and well established rule of practice which by convention and long usage has almost hardened into a rule of law, namely, that relief asked for and available at the stage of final disposal of writ proceedings, is not, except for special reasons, to be granted as interim relief at the interlocutory stage, blatant disregard of this rule is revealed here.'
In the instant case learned Single Judge has granted a relief to the petitioner-respondent which may not be made available to him even at the time final disposal of the writ petition. The impugned order does not contain any special reason as to why such an order was passed.