Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties no.1 and 3 and Mr. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.4. It is submitted that since nomenclature of opposite party no.2 is incorrect, therefore no notices were accepted on his behalf.
Learned counsel for petitioner is granted liberty to correct the nomenclature of opposite party no.2 as 'Secretary, Basic Education Board, U.P. Prayagraj' during course of the day. Notices on behalf of the said opposite party have been accepted by Mr. Ajay Singh, learned counsel.
Petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties no.4 decide the representation given the O.P. No.4 consider the judgment passed by Hon'ble High Court a true photo copy of order dated 10.07.2019 passed by O.P. No.4 and representation dated 09.10.2019 given by the petitioner to O.P. No.4 annexed in the writ petition contained in the Annexure No.1 and 2 and appointment as a assistant teacher when vacancy if publication in year 2018 as a assistant teacher. And further direction is given to commanding the opposite party petitioner given the joining as a assistant teacher and paid the salary.
(ii) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be passed in the circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.
(iii) Allow the writ petition with the costs."
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the controversy in question has already been settled by judgment and order dated 17.04.2019 passed in Writ-A No.23691 of 2018 (Vikram Singh & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors) whereby it has been held that eligibility of a candidate to seek enrollment in the Diploma Course is not restricted to graduates. Attention has also been drawn to the judgment and order dated 10.05.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.5981 of 2019 (Suraj Kumar Tripathi vs. State of U.P & Ors.) on the same proposition.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that earlier petitioner had also filed Writ Petition No.17526 of 2019 seeking the same relief. The said writ petition was disposed of by means of order dated 19.06.2019 directing the opposite parties to consider petitioner's representation in the light of directions issued by this Court in the case of Vikram Singh (supra). In pursuance to the directions issued, petitioner had submitted a representation but since the same was not decided within time, he was compelled to file Contempt Petition No.2470 of 2019 (Swati vs. Rubi Singh & Ors.) the same was disposed of vide order dated 05.12.2019 on the ground that petitioner's representation has already been decided vide order dated 10.07.2019.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that vide order dated 10.07.2019, the petitioner's representation has not been decided and has in fact been kept pending on the ground that the case of Vikram Singh (supra) still under consideration of the State Government and necessary orders pertaining to petitioner would be passed once the State Government takes a final decision regarding the consent.
Learned counsel for petitioner has thereafter drawn attention to the order dated 03.10.2019 whereby the said Vikram Singh has been issued appointment letter in pursuance to directions issued by this Court in his writ petition. Thus, it is submitted that once the said Vikram Singh has already been granted appointment, the petitioner is entitled to the same benefits in view of the directions issued by this Court earlier.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties do not dispute the fact that this Court had earlier issued directions vide order dated 19.06.2019 for consideration of petitioner's case in parity with the said Vikram Singh. Order dated 03.10.2019 annexed as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition clearly indicates that the said Vikram Singh has already been granted appointment in the department.
In view thereof and particularly in view of the order dated 19.06.2019 passed by this Court earlier, the opposite parties are obligated to pass relevant orders in keeping with the directions issued by this Court earlier.
In view of aforesaid, opposite party no.4 i.e. District Officer Basic Education Officer, Hardoi is directed to pass appropriate order in terms of the directions issued by this Court dated 19.06.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.17526 (S/S) of 2019 within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before the said authority.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Subodh/-