Ravi Shankar vs State of U.P.and others.

V.K. Shukla, J.

Present writ petition has been filed questioning the validity of the order dated 4.11.2008 wherein earlier advertisement has been canalled on the ground that no female category candidate had applied and further directives have been issued for inviting fresh application.

This fact has been accepted that there are two posts of Shiksha Mitra for which advertisement was issued on 12.9.2008. Petitioner applied, and in all three applications had been filed. Village Education Committee recommended the name of petitioner, thereafter, said claim has been rejected with the direction for denovo fresh selection proceeding.

This fact has also been accepted that there are two posts of Shiksha Mitra available at Primary School, Seedha Ahilapur, District Mau. Out of two posts, which had been identified, one post has been occupied by Smt. Sangita Maurya and other post was occupied by Balwant. As per policy formulated, first post of Shiksha Mitra has to go to the said category as per delimitation of the constituency of the Pradhan and second post identified, has to go to female category candidate. In the present case seat of Pradhan is reserved for femalegeneralcategory and as such first post has to go to female category candidate and second post has also to be given to female category candidate, in this background once first post is reserved for the category from which Pradhan is there as per delimitation and as such second post go to female category candidate. Provision of of U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994 are not at all applicable, as selection is not at all against the public service or post and thus reservation has to be applied as per policy formulated. Consequently, first post has to go to the category from which Pradhan is there and second post has to go to female category candidate. Thus view, which has been taken is correct view, and same warrants no interference.

Consequently, writ petition is dismissed.