Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23124 of 2018 Petitioner :- Atul Kishore Awasthi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- K.K. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
1. Petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the Secretary, U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad, to appoint petitioners as Trainee Teacher in basic schools, pursuant to advertisement issued on 30.11.2011, in light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 25.7.2017 in Civil Appeal Nos.4347-4375 of 2014 (State of U.P. and others vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak and others). Operative portion of the Apex Court's order reads as under:-
"19. We have been informed that 66,655 teachers have already been appointed in pursuance of the interim orders of this Court. Having regard to the entirety of circumstances, we are not inclined to disturb the same. We make it clear that the State is at liberty to fill up the remaining vacancies in accordance with law after issuing a fresh advertisement."
The Apex Court has granted liberty to the State to fill up the remaining vacancies, in accordance with law, after issuing a fresh advertisement.
2. While entertaining the writ petition, learned State Counsel was allowed time to obtain instructions. A Government Order has been issued by the State on 24.4.2018, stating that no further selection/recruitment can be made pursuant to the advertisement dated 30.11.2011 to fill remaining 6170 vacancies.
3. Once the Apex Court has granted liberty to the State to fill up the remaining vacancies, in accordance with law, after issuing a fresh advertisement, it would be difficult for this Court to issue a direction as is prayed for. Similar view has already been taken by this Court in bunch of petitions being leading Writ Petition No.38341 of 2017 (Akhilesh Kumar Pandey and others vs. State of U.P. and others) in following words:-
"In view of the clear direction of the Supreme Court, this Court finds that the relief sought for by the petitioners to reopen the issues on merit regarding appointment of 862 candidates in pursuance of the interim order dated 07th December, 2015 is misconceived. As noted above, all the 66,655 appointments including 862 candidates have not been disturbed by the Supreme Court. Thus, this Court has no jurisdiction to even consider the alleged illegality, if any, in the appointments made pursuant to the said interim order.
Additionally, the Supreme Court has directed to issue fresh advertisement for recruitment in respect of remaining vacancies. I am of the view that if the prayer sought by the petitioners is granted, it can tantamount to modify the order of the Supreme Court, therefore, said prayer cannot be granted.
For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, I find that the writ petitions lack merit and are accordingly dismissed."
4. The view taken by learned Single Judge in Ahkhilesh Kumar Pandey (supra) has been approved by the Division Bench in Special Appeal Defective Nos.582 of 2017 and 593 of 2017 vide order dated 27.11.2017. The order of the Division Bench reads as under:-
"1. Heard Shri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants, learned Standing Counsel and Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. The Apex Court, in the case of State of U.P. and others vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak in Civil Appeal Nos. 4347-4375 of 2014, while deciding entire bunch, clearly directed that appointments already made would continue but in respect of remaining vacancies, Government was directed to proceed for making fresh advertisement.
3. In view of the aforesaid direction, issued by Apex Court, learned Single Judge has rightly declined to grant any relief to appellants on the ground that they are candidates claiming appointment pursuant to selection made as per Government Order dated 27th September, 2011, but having not been appointed, now the vacancies have to be filled in by fresh process of recruitment.
4. Since, operative part of the order in State of U.P. and others vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak (supra), clearly shows that with regard to existing vacancies, Government shall proceed to make fresh recruitment in our view, learned Single Judge has rightly declined to grant any relief to appellants.
5. Since, matter is concluded by judgment of Apex Court, we find no infirmity with the judgment under appeal passed by learned Single Judge so as to warrant interference.
6. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed."
5. In view of the discussions aforesaid, petitioners are not entitled to the relief prayed for in this petition, and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Ashok Kr.