Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13196 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Mamta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jai Krishna Tiwari
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
In identical facts and circumstances, a writ petition no.10033 of 2018 (Smt. Poonam Vs. State of U.P. and Others) was disposed of by this Court on 17.4.2018, vide following orders:-
"Petitioner has also participated for selection alongwith respondent no.5 for appointment to the post of Head Mistress in the institution run by the Basic Education Department of the State. It appears that respondent no. 5 was selected while petitioner was placed at Sl. No.2. This selection was made in the year 2015. The petitioner claims to have acquired some information with regard to work experience of respondent no.5, which according to her, is not admissible and could not have been relied upon by the selection committee. In respect of such grievances, petitioner has also approached the District Basic Education Officer, Ghaziabad. The record reveals that notices have been issued on 13.3.2018 to the Manager of the institution and also to respondent no. 5. This petition has been filed for appropriate directions, in that regard.
Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Gaurav Kumar Chand states that the challenge to appointment of respondent no. 5 is highly belated, inasmuch as selection made in the year 2015 ought not to be allowed to be questioned, at this stage. Various submissions on the claim of respondent no. 5 on merits have also been made.
Be that as it may, once the issue is pending before the District Basic Education Officer, Ghaziabad, and notices have also been issued to respondent no. 5, also no useful purpose would be served in examining the legality of appointment, by this Court, at this stage. The authority concerned may examine the challenge to the appointment of respondent no.5, in accordance with law and all objections including that of latches would be available to respondent no. 5 for being contended in defence. The required consideration would be made by the authority concerned, preferably within a period of 3 months."
It is pointed out that in the present case also, all such facts have been brought to the notice of the authority, and notices have been issued in the matter.
Since the issue is pending before the authority concerned, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the order dated 17.4.2018.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 Anil