Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 56549 of 2017 Petitioner :- Daya Nand Patel And 3 Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Vardhan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohd Shere Ali
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
By means of the instant petition, petitioner seeks the following relief:
"i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to absorb the petitioners in the department as assistant teacher."
Similar matter came to be decided by the Supreme Court in a batch of civil appeals being Civil Appeal Nos. 4347-4375 of 2014, State of U.P. and others v. Shiv Kumar Pathak and others, and the connected appeals were finally disposed of by this Court on 25.7.2017. Relevant part of the judgment of the Supreme Court reads as under:
"17. As a result of above, in normal course the State would have been at liberty to proceed with the selection in terms of advertisement dated 7th December, 2012 in accordance with the amended rules by way of 15th amendment, in view of developments which have taken place during pendency of these appeals, the said advertisement cannot proceed and while upholding the said advertisement, relief has to be moulded in the light of developments that have taken place in the interregnum.
*** *** *** 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."
A perusal of the operative portion of the judgment of the Supreme Court goes to show that all the 66,655 appointments made during the pendency of the appeal have been left undisturbed and the State has been granted liberty to fill up the remaining vacancies in accordance with law after issuing fresh advertisement.
Thereafter, this Court in Arvind Kumar and others Versus State of U.P. and others (Writ-A No. 39620 of 2017), decided on 19 September 2017, following the decision of Shiv Kumar Pathak (supra), dismissed the petition. The operative portion is extracted:
"In view of the direction of the Supreme Court, in my view, it is not possible to issue any direction for the appointment of the petitioners against 6160 vacancies, which according to them are still lying vacant. The direction of the Supreme Court is very clear that remaining vacancies has to be filled up by the fresh advertisement. In this regard the State has been granted liberty in clear terms.
After careful consideration of the matter, I am of the view that no direction can be issued to the State Government to permit the petitioners to join the vacant posts of the trainee teachers for the reasons mentioned above. It is open to the State Government to take appropriate decision in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court, mentioned above.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs"
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed in terms of the decision rendered in Arvind Kumar (supra).
Order Date :- 28.11.2017 K.K. Maurya