Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11304 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shahid Khan And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Sankalp Narain Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J.
Heard Shri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The petitioners are Class-IV employees of an aided minority intermediate college. There were vacancies in the institution and 7 posts were advertised and after the selection committee considering the applicants selected the petitioners. The papers were forwarded to the D.I.O.S. for financial sanction. The D.I.O.S. refused to grant sanction taking a ground that 7 posts were advertised and only 6 were selected and second ground was that the post having remained vacant have lapsed. The petitioners challenged the order of the D.I.O.S. dated 23.3.2019 by filing writ petition before this Court being Writ Petition No. 4768 of 2019 (Shahid Khan and 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and 6 others) and this Court did not accept the objections raised by the D.I.O.S. either with regard to selection of only 6 candidates out of 7 posts advertised or the ground that the post has lapsed. The writ petition was disposed of by order dated 15.4.2019. Thereafter the matter was placed before the D.I.O.S. for reconsideration and now again the D.I.O.S. has passed an order including the earlier ground upon which the writ petition was disposed of, further adding that since Regulation 101 of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 provided for appointment on Class-IV only through outsourcing. That amendment has been quashed by this Court in the case of Principal, Abhay Nandan Inter College, Vishnu Mandir and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in 2019(4) ADJ 819 (DB) against which a SLP has been filed in the Supreme Court and since the same is pending, but no interim direction has been be issued.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the SLP is defective and the defect has not been removed so far. As such, it cannot be said that the SLP is pending. He further submits that even if SLP is pending, but since no interim order has been passed, the dictate of the High Court cannot be ignored merely on the ground that the SLP is pending.
Considering the submissions placed and argument raised in this writ petition, the order of the D.I.O.S. dated 7.6.2019 cannot be sustained and it is hereby quashed with the direction to the D.I.O.S. to consider the claim of the petitioners ignoring the objections raised in the order impugned. The said decision shall be taken within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented before the D.I.O.S.
The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 Sunil Kr. Gupta