Sanjay Kumar vs State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 3988 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?
 
Court No. - 20
 

 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 5346 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Ground Water And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Rahul Mishra,Ram Samujh Yadav
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
 
Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Arora,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Notice on behalf of opposite parties no. 1 to 3 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel. 

In view of the order proposed in this writ petition, issuance of notice to opposite parties no.4 and 5 is dispensed with.

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to declare the result/ appointment of the interview held on 14.7.2008 for the post of Truck Driver in pursuance of the advertisement no. 9/2008 dated 6.4.2008.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance of the special recruitment drive initiated by the State Government for filling up the vacancies belonging tot he Back log Category, an advertisement no. 09/Back log/2008 was published by the opposite party no.3 inviting applications for appointment on various posts including  the post of Truck Drivers.   The petitioner in pursuance of the said advertisement, applied for appointment on the post of Truck Driver and was called for interview vide letter dated 28.6.2008.  The petitioner appeared before the Selection Committee on 14.7.2008.  The petitioner waited for sufficient long period to know the result of selection and ultimately approached the opposite party no.3 to know the fate of the result.  When no reply was given by the opposite party no.3 the petitioner also moved an application under the provision of R.T.I. Act of 2005 on 10.12.2008 and 24.2.2009 but reply of the same was  also not given to the petitioner.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that necessary directions  may be issued to the opposite party no.3 to consider and decide the issue of appointment of the petitioner in pursuance of the advertisement no. 9/2008 dated6.4.2008, for which selection was held on 14.7.2008, within time frame fixed by this Court

Taking into consideration  the innocuous prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner, without entering into merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the opposite party no.3 to  examine the issue with respect to the appointment of the petitioner in pursuance of interview held on 14.7.2008 for the post of Truck Driver in pursuance of the Advertisement No. 9/2008 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and the decision so taken will be communicated to the petitioner.

Order Date :- 20.8.2011

Muk