Arun Shukla and Another vs State of U.P. and Others

Heard learned Counsel for the parties on merit and perused the record.

The present special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 21.5.2008 passed by his Lordship Hon. Mr. Justice Sanjai Mishra in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8006 of 2007, Dhananjai Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8006 of 2007by which the writ petition was allowed.

Facts giving rise to filing of the aforesaid writ petition in brief are that four posts of class IV employee were advertised by Respondent No. 5, the Principal, Lokmanya Inter College, Janki Nagar, District Kushi Nagar in daily Newspaper " Aaj" dated 1.1.2007. As per advertisement, the last date for submission of the application form was 21.1.2007. It is stated that Respondent No. 5 published the corrigendum to the advertisement dated 1.1.2007 whereby modifying the last date of submission of the application form as 15.1.2007 in place of 21.1.2007. Thus, the last date of submission of the application form was preponed by the Principal of the College.

The Appellants submit that they had been selected by the Selection Committee, therefore, they have legal right to be appointed in the vacancy of class IV post advertised by the college.

It appears from the record that Sri Dhananjay Singh, one of the aspirants for the post of Class IV filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8006 of 2007 praying for quashing of the entire selection process as he was deprived from participating in the selection due to preponment of the last date of submission of the application form. The writ petition

was allowed vide order dated 21.5.2008 on the statement of Principal of the college that the entire selection process should be cancelled as rights of other candidates have been effected by the preponment of last date of submission of the application form. In the circumstances, the entire selection held by Respondent No. 5 in pursuance of the advertisement dated 1.1.2007 and 12.1.2007 was quashed with liberty to the Respondent institution to advertise the post afresh in accordance with law. It is this judgment dated 21.5.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge has been challenged in the present special appeal.

Learned Counsel for the Appellants has placed reliance upon paragraph 11 of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in State of U.P. and others Vs. Ravindra Nath Rai and others, in which it has been held thus:

11, First submission of the learned standing counsel regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, based on decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Shankarsan Dash Vs. Union of India, , holding that the successful candidates have no indefeasible right to be appointed, was rejected by the learned Single Judge by observing that the said decision itself states that although a person may not have indefeasible right to be appointed, yet this does not mean that the State has the licence for acting in an arbitrary manner. In support of instant appeal also, the learned Standing counsel submits that as the Petitioners have no indefeasible right to appointment, they could not maintain the writ petition.

From perusal of the aforesaid paragraph 11 of the judgment it appears that in that case the Court was considering the question regarding the maintainability of the writ petition in the context whether in a given circumstance the selected candidate has an indefeasible right to post and that action of the State in the facts and circumstances of this case was arbitrary or not whereas in the present case there is no such question, hence the case law cited by the learned Counsel for the Appellants is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

After hearing learned Counsel for the Appellants and the learned Standing counsel we are of the view that the preponment of last date of submission of the application form does affect the right of the candidates who could not apply, therefore, we find that the Principal of the college has acted fairly stating before the Court that the selection process in pursuance to the advertisement dated 1.1.2007 and 12.1.2007 should be cancelled for holding fresh selections.

The rights of the Appellants to participate in fresh selections have not been denied rather of other candidates right who had been deprived from participating in selection process due to preponment of last date of submission of form, has been recognized by the Principal of the college.

For all the reasons stated above, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the reasonings given by his Lordship in the impugned judgment. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.