Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54773 of 2017 Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Yadav And 7 Others Respondent :- Regional Committee Headed By J.D. Education Azamgarh And 4 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Raj Singh,Adarsh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
An order passed by the Regional Level Committee, disapproving the appointment of all eight petitioners, vide order dated 6.11.2017, is assailed in the writ petition.
Petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 30492 of 2017 which came to be disposed of by following orders passed on 17.7.2017:-
"All the eight petitioners are the candidates for the appointment to the post of Assistant Teachers in the primary Section of Nehru Intermediate College, Ratanpura, District Mau.
In para no. 4 to the writ petition, the details have been mentioned about the nature of the vacancy which reveals that most of the posts fall vacant due to the retirement of regular Assistant Teachers. It is stated that the institution has sought the approval from the District Inspector of Schools for initiating the recruitment process against the said vacancies, which were duly accorded by the District Inspector of Schools on 09.03.2016. Pursuant thereto, the advertisements were issued in two well known daily news papers namely "Danik Jagaran on 16.03.2016 and "Aaj on 15.03.2016. The petitioners have made their applications pursuant to the said advertisement and they have found suitable by the Selection Committee.
It is stated that the Management has sent the papers to the office of District Inspector of Schools for approval of the aforesaid selection, however, no decision has been taken as yet. It is averred in the writ petition that the Management has sent papers on 02.05.2016 which is lying unattended in the office of District Inspector of Schools.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties the writ petition is taken on the board for its final disposal in terms of the Rules of the Court.
Taking into consideration that the matter is pending for the last one years but the District Inspector of Schools has not taken any decision, in my view, the ends of justice requires that the writ petition is being disposed of with a direction to the District Inspector of Schools to take appropriate decision in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within six weeks from the date of communication of this order.
It is common experience that the District Inspector of Schools and the Deputy Director of Education do not pass orders on the papers sent to their offices and the Committee of Management as well as the candidates are being compelled to file writ petition in this Court. This Court is already struggling with the huge pendency of the cases due to inaction on the part of State Government and its officials.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of."
It appears that one Jai Prakash Singh had filed a Special Appeal No. 420 of 2017 with the leave of the Court contending that in fact selection had not been undertaken in fair manner and a collusive exercise was undertaken by the Committee of Management to fill up the posts. The special appeal bench disposed of the appeal by passing following orders on 18.8.2017:-
"We need not enter into the issue with regards to the application made by the appellant for leave to appeal in the facts of the present case inasmuch as interest of substantial justice would be served if we clarify the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.07.2017, passed in Writ-A No.30492 of 2017, by only providing that while considering the matter as directed by learned Single Judge in respect of the appointment claimed by writ petitioners in primary section attached to a recognized and aided intermediate college the authority concerned shall keep in mind the provisions of Intermediate Act and the government orders applicable on the subject including those contained in the Government Orders dated 25.05.2012 and 3.1.2017 as well as the law laid down by this Court in the matter of appointment of teachers in primary sections of recognized and aided intermediate colleges.
We further provide that in view of the provision of Government order dated 3.1.2017 the matter needs to be examined by the Regional Level Committee of which Regional Joint Director of Education is the member. Therefore the District Inspector of Schools in terms of the directions issued by writ court shall transmit the papers to the Regional Level Committee which shall take appropriate decision within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. All issues are left open to be examined by the Regional Level Committee. The judgment of the learned Single Judge is modified accordingly.
With the aforesaid observations, special appeal is disposed of."
It is pursuant to this order that petitioners claim for appointment has been considered by the Regional Level Committee and such claim has been rejected on 6.11.2017. Apart from other grounds taken, it is observed by the Regional Level Committee that against advertisement issued by the Committee to appoint eight Assistant Teachers in the primary section, a total number of 47 candidates had applied, but only eight candidates appeared and all those who appeared were selected. Serious doubts have been raised with regard to conduct of selection on the ground that the selection itself lacks transparency and that is why only eight persons have appeared for interview against eight vacancies.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that none has come forward to challenge the selection and that there is no fetters for the committee to select eight persons who alone appear for selection after the vacancy is advertised.
Judicial notice can be taken by this Court of the large scale unemployment prevailing in this country. It is difficult for this Court to fathom that only eight persons will appear pursuant to eight vacancy. Forty seven persons are said to have applied for appointment but only eight turned up. The Regional Level Committee, therefore, cannot be said to have erred, if doubts have been raised with regard to fairness in the conduct of selection itself for such reasons. No case for interference by this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India is made out.
The Committee of Management shall, however, be at liberty to advertise the vacancy afresh in accordance with law, and it will be open for the petitioners also to apply therein.
Subject to the observations made above, this petition is consigned to records.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 Ranjeet Sahu