The petitioner and respondent no.5 both were candidates for the post of Shiksha Mitra. In the select panel respondent no.5 was placed at serial no.1 and the petitioner was placed at serial no.3. The application form of candidate placed at serial no.2 was ultimately rejected. The petitioner was given appointment. The respondent no.5 was not given appointment and, therefore, she made a representation which was directed to be decided by the Court within a time bound period. Now the said representation has been decided by the impugned order dated 8.6.2010 in her favour. According to impugned order, respondent no.5 is resident of the village concerned, inasmuch as after marriage a women acquires the domicile of the place of her husband.
The petitioner contends that according to Government Order dated 18.2.2003 until and unless a persons resides in a place for three years he cannot be said to be the resident of said place and since the respondent no.5 has not completed the said period of three years in the village of her husband she cannot be considered to be a resident of the village of her husband.
In view of above, the question whether the respondents no.5 can be considered to be a resident of the village of her husband even though on the relevant she had not completed three years is required to be considered.
Learned Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents no.1, 2 and 3, Sri C.N.Tripathi holding brief of Sri Rajeshwar Singh appearing for respondent no.4 and Sri A.K.Tiwari holding brief of Sri Bikas Kumar Mishra appearing for respondent no.5 pray for and are allowed a month's time to file counter affidavit. Three weeks thereafter are allowed to the petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit.
List thereafter.
Till the next date of listing, the working of the petitioner, if she is working, shall not be disturbed.
Order Date :- 25.6.2010 BK