Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17907 of 2003 Petitioner :- Meera Devi Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- H.C. Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri H.C. Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for petitioner has drawn attention to para 47 of the writ petition which reads as under :-
"47. That the admitted position as contained in letter dated 24.8.2002 itself speaks that the selection to give appointments have been made in contravention of rules and constitutional commitments."
3. However, in the relief, I find that no selection/appointment of any person is under challenge and nobody has been impleaded. When confronted, learned counsel for petitioner could not dispute this fact.
4. Petitioner is, however, claiming a writ of mandamus commanding respondents to give appointment but could not show any vested right in petitioner for appointment.
5. This writ petition is thoroughly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 Siddhant Sahu