S.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the appointment of opposite party No. 5.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present petition are that second vacancy for appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra in Primary School Turkpurwa was published and in pursuance thereof the petitioner applied for the said post being eligible candidate. It is said that on the first vacancy one Chandra Mani Tiwari (petitioner of Writ Petition No. 4329 (SS) of 2003) is already working since 5.9.2005 and his appointment has also been renewed by the Village Education Committee for the session 2006 -07. On 1.7.2000 the State Government has issued an order, wherein it has been provided that the second post of Shiksha Mitra must be reserved for lady candidate, but the Village Education Committee has accepted the applications of male candidates ignoring the aforesaid Government Order. It is also stated that in the merit list name of the petitioner appears at serial No. 2 and one Neelam Mishra, who is at serial No. 1 gave an affidavit that she is not willing to join on account of the fact that she has married, as such the petitioner is eligible for appointment on the second post in all respects, but the opposite parties in an arbitrary manner have not given the appointment to the petitioner and given appointment to opposite party No. 5, who is a male category candidate and is at serial No. 4 in the merit list, ignoring the Government order dated 1.7.200 which provides 50% reservation for women category candidate. In this regard the petitioner made several representations to the authority concerned. When no action was taken by the authorities, the petitioner has filed present petition for quashing of the appointment of opposite party No. 5. This Court by means of order dated 17.1.2007 disposed of the writ petition finally with the direction to the petitioner to pursue her representation submitted to the District Magistrate. It was also provided that if any third post is provided in the institution, then only the petitioner's case may be considered by holding de novo selection if she is otherwise eligible. The aforesaid order was subjected to challenge in Special Appeal No. 744(SB) of 2007, which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 6.9.2007 and the order dated 17.1.2007 was set aside. Submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the second post should be filled up by a female category candidate in accordance with the Government order dated 1.7.2000, by means of which 50% reservation has been prescribed for the female category candidates, but the opposite parties in an arbitrary manner ignored the rightful claim of the petitioner being lady and higher in the merit by giving appointment to a male category candidate i.e. opposite party No. 5.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Basic Shiksha Adhikari by filing counter affidavit has stated that opposite party No. 5 had been selected for the second post of Shiksha Mitra for the session 2006 -2007 and since then he is working on the said post after getting renewal from term to term. He has further stated that opposite party No. 5 was having the certificate of instructor under non -formal education and as such he was given the preference in the selection of second post in accordance with the Government Order dated 10.10.2005, whereas the petitioner was not an instructor and as such she could not be given appointment.;