Allahabad High Court
Radhey Shyam Singh Yadav And Others vs The State Of U.P. And Others on 14 March, 2023
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 63474 of 2011 Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Singh Yadav And Others Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- V.K.Singh,G.K.Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,K.S.Kushwaha,S K Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Samarth Singh holding brief of Sri V.K. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State respondents.
The present petition has been preferred for seeking order and direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 29.08.2011 which has been passed in pursuance to the judgment dated 24.05.2011 in Writ A No. 29472 of 2011 (Radhey Shyam Singh Yadav and others vs. State of U.P. and others).
In compliance to the direction dated 24.05.2011 passed by this Court, the representation for seeking extension of the salary over the post on which the petitioners rendered their services has been thoroughly considered by way of examining the documents related to the petitioners and the mandated procedure for appointment over the said post. The representation as preferred by the petitioner has been answered in detail vide order dated 29.08.2011 passed by Director Education (Basic) which has been put under challenge by way of filing the instant petition.
Per contra learned Standing counsel vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and supported the stand taken up by the respondent no. 2 while passing the order dated 29.08.2011.
In response to the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel pointed out that none of the petitioner produced any documents related to their appointment over the post of Assistant Teacher at the time of affording the proper opportunity of hearing before the respondent no. 2. Moreover in spite of non-presentation of the documents which demonstrates the legality of their claims as put forward by the petitioner, the entire records of the department has been examined and verified through which it has been found that no such appointment has ever been made in favour of the petitioners by any of the competent authority by way of adopting the proper procedure for recruitment over the post of Assistant Teacher.
The similar stand has been taken up by the official respondents while preferring the counter-affidavit in reply to the averements made in the petition.
While rebutting the stand of the counter-affidavit the petitioners although preferred the rejoinder affidavit but no plausible reasons and grounds have been apprised for substantiating the stand for seeking relief as made in the petition.
By bare perusal of the narration as well as the fair pleadings advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is apparent from the records that the appointment which has been held dehors by the competent authority seems to be justified and there is hardly any cause of action survives in favour of the petitioner to claim such relief as made in the writ petition.
In view of the aforesaid reasons, the petition stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.3.2023 Shaswat