Vijay Kumar And 26 Others vs Engineer In Chief And Head Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6345 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 36
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3611 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar And 26 Others
 
Respondent :- Engineer In Chief And Head Of Department Irrigation And Water Resources Department And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Saurabh Pratap Singh,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv),Shikher Trivedi,Sumant Krishna Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prabhakar Awasthi
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. This writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19.08.2020 (Annexure no. 8) passed by respondent no. 5/ Additional Chief Secretary, Irrigation and Water Resources Department.

B. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents not to carry forward posts.

C. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to issue to appointment letters in favour of the petitioners against the posts on which the candidates have not joined."

2. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent-4 submits that similar controversy has been decided against petitioners in Writ-A No. 12014 of 2021 (Pavan Kumar vs. Engineer in Chief and Head of Department and others), decided on 20.09.2021.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that on aforesaid judgment contentions of petitioners are not considered, therefore, this writ petition could be heard on merit.

4. In Pavan Kumar (supra) this Court passed following order:

"Heard Sri Siddharth Singhal, learned counsel appearing for the Commission. None has appeared on behalf of the petitioner even when the matter is taken up in the revised call.

The petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs: -

"a) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to carry forward posts.

b) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue the appointment letter in favour of the petitioner against the post on which the candidates to not joined."

Sri Singhal learned counsel apprises the Court that final results for 3210 posts of Tubewell Operators were declared on 27 November 2019 and that no provision for waiting list stands engrafted.

In view of the aforesaid, the Court finds no ground to issue the writs as prayed for. The Court fails to find any right inhering in the petitioner to seek a restraint on carry forward of posts merely by virtue of the fact that he had applied and participated in the selection process which had been undertaken pursuant to an advertisement issued in 2016.

Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed."

5. Since a Coordinate Bench of this Court has already taken a view on merit, therefore, this Court has no reason to hear this matter on merit. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed in view of judgment passed in Pavan Kumar (supra).

Order Date :- 8.7.2022

AK