Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8308 of 2021 Petitioner :- Shailendra Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari,Parvez Alam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.
The present writ petition has been filed alleging that in terms of the recruitment exercise for recruitment of Assistant Teacher in the Primary School of Department of Shiksha Parishad, the petitioner appeared and was selected, and subsequent to the counseling, the petitioner started working in the Primary School Devha, Kanpur Nagar since 2.11.2020. Subsequently, the petitioner was called upon to submit a reply for show cause notice dated 17.3.2021 only calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the certificate of domicile submitted by the petitioner issued on 9.6.2020 may not be rejected in view of the fact that the last date of submission of form was 28.5.2020. The petitioner filed a reply to the same, however, on the sole ground that the domicile certificate of the petitioner was issued on 9.6.2020 subsequent to the last date of submission of the form on 28.5.2020, his appointment has been cancelled by means of the impugned order dated 18.6.2021 (Annexure No. 16).
Counsel for the petitioner argues that the controversy raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Neetu Vs. State of UP and three others (Writ A No. 4871 of 2021) wherein this Court following the earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Sumit and 14 others Vs. State of UP and 2 others (Writ Petition (A) No. 4714 of 2019) and Vipin Kumar Maurya and 4 others Vs. State of UP (Writ A No. 11039 of 2018) held that the Paragraph 3 (1) of one of the Government Order dated 4.12.2020 as well as Paragraph 2(2) of the Government Order dated 5.3.2021 to be ultra vires the 1981 rules and unconstitutional being in violation of Article 16(2).
In the light of the said judgment, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 18.6.2021 quashing the appointment of the petitioner solely on the ground of lack of domicile certificate issued after the cut off date is set aside with a direction to the Basic Education Officer, Kanpur Nagar/concerned authority to permit the petitioner to continue and teach. He shall also be entitled to payment of salary in accordance with law.
The writ petition stands allowed in terms of the said order.
Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be treated as certified copy of the order.
Order Date :- 28.9.2021 vinay