Pawan Kumar vs State Of Up And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 17551 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Pawan Kumar vs State Of Up And 2 Others on 16 May, 2024

Author: Piyush Agrawal

Bench: Piyush Agrawal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:88325
 
Court No. - 36
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7633 of 2024
 
Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Awtar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Archana Singh,C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
 

Shri Shresth Pratap Singh, holding brief of Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the respondents - Basic Education states that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the adjudication made by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgement & order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Special Appeal No. 160 of 2024 (Secretary Basic Shiksha Parishad Vs. Vinay Kumar Pandey & 11 Others), along with other connected appeals, wherein, while rejecting the claim of the petitioners in the writ petition, following observations have been made:-

"104. The recruitment in this case had been initiated in 2011 and the dispute was ultimately resolved by the Supreme Court in 2017. In the ultimate adjudication, the Supreme Court merely protected appointments made under the interim orders of the Court. Contempt petitions filed before the Supreme Court at the instance of leftover 12091 shortlisted candidates has also been dismissed in 2019. Claim of writ petitioners that they were appointed or that their appointment was included in 66655 appointments protected by the Supreme Court is found misconceived, inasmuch as, only 391 from 12091 shortlisted candidates were actually appointed and the figure of 66655 appointments consisted of other candidates and not the leftover candidates from 12091 shortlisted candidates. Repeated rounds of writs filed before this Court also failed. After expiry of nearly 13 years, a direction in favour of these shortlisted candidates ought not to be issued on their mere asking in derogation of the previous adjudication made by this Court and the Supreme Court. In such view of the matter, the special appeals filed by the Board and the State succeed and are allowed. Judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 12.1.2014 in bunch of writ petitions is set aside. All the writ petitions filed before the learned Single Judge are consequently dismissed.

105. Since the claim of 12091 candidates has already been rejected after noticing that the Supreme Court itself had recorded a finding in 2019 itself that there has been no violation of the orders of the Supreme Court, as such, the claim of other petitioners, who were not included in the list of 12091 candidates has rightly been rejected by the learned Single Judge in para 15 of the judgment. Special appeals filed by such candidates, not forming part of 12091 candidates, are also accordingly dismissed for the reasons recorded above."

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid fact.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed on the same terms.

Order Date :- 16.5.2024

Amit Mishra