Allahabad High Court
Smt. Adya Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 26 August, 2013
Bench: Sudhir Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16597 of 2013
Petitioner :- Smt. Adya Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Deshraj Singh Chauhan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
This writ petition has been filed by petitioner Smt. Adya Yadav, seeking following reliefs:
?i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 02.03.2013 (Annexure No. 9) passed by Respondent no.3/District Programme Officer (D.P.O.) Mau, otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss any injury.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner according to the Government order dated 16.12.2003
iii) Issue a writ, order of direction commanding the respondents not to make any advertisement for same vacancy till the pendency of this writ petition.?
2. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to advertisement dated 14.09.2010 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) she participated in selection for the post of Angan Bari Karyakartri. A copy of selection chart is Annexure-2 to the writ petition, wherein petitioner figures at serial no.3. It is claimed that certain certificates submitted by first two candidates, mentioned in the select list at serial no.1 and 2, having been found forged, they are ineligible and the petitioner is entitled to be appointed on the said post, for which, representational made by her did not find favour with the competent authority, who rejected the same.
3. Learned Standing Counsel could not dispute that the matter involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of date, passed in writ petition no.(A) 11551 of 2013, Smt. Gyanwati Vs. State of U.P. and others. For the reasons stated therein, and, in terms thereof, the impugned order dated 02.03.2013 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition), passed by District Programme Officer, Mau, respondent no.3, rejecting the petitioner's representation dated 07.12.2012 (Anenxure 7), is hereby quashed and respondent competent authority is directed to consider the claim of petitioner for appointment to the post of Angan Bari Karyakartri in the light of her selection made pursuant to advertisement made on 14.09.2010 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the competent authority to examine the matter, with respect to genuineness of any documents relating to eligibility etc. of petitioner and if anything is found wrong, therein appropriate order shall be passed by it giving reason(s) after complying with the requirement of principles of natural justice. A copy of judgment of date passed in writ petition no. A-11551 of 2013 shall form part of this judgment.
4. Subject to above, the writ petition stands disposed of.
5. No order as to costs.
Dated: 26.08.2013
Akn
