JAGDISH MAURYA Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
LAWS(ALL)-2010-3-311
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (AT: LUCKNOW)
Decided on March 11,2010

Jagdish Maurya Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present petition has been filed for quashing of the advertisement dated 3.2.2010 and the Government Order dated 29.6.2002 and with a further prayer to remove the restriction imposed by the said Government Order.
(2.) The petitioner in pursuance to the advertisement in 2006 applied for the post of Co-ordinator of Block Resource Centre and he was selected and appointment letter was issued in his favour on 3.3.2006. The petitioner joined in pursuance to the aforesaid appointment letter and continued to discharge his duties as Co-ordinator of Block Resource Centre for a period of four years. Thereafter, Government Order, which was issued on 1.9.2001, was amended by means of the present impugned Government Order dated 29.6.2002 making certain amendment in the procedure of appointment, wherein it was provided that all those teachers, who have worked as Co-ordinator of Block Resource Centre and Assistant Co-ordinator of Block Resource Centre for a period of two years, will not be selected again for the said post and new incumbents will be given opportunity with certain experience enumerated therein to the extent of having teaching experience of eight years in basic schools and three years for Assistant Co-ordinator of Block Resource Centre and five years for Co-ordinator of Nyay Panchayat Resource Centre. The said Government Order is put to challenge by way of this petition. 2. Submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner has already worked for a period of four years and, therefore, he is entitled to continue and he cannot be replaced by a similarly selected person on officiating basis. He further submits that no defect has been found in the working of the petitioner and moreover the petitioner has been considerable experience and, therefore, he is entitled for the continuance on the post in question and the fresh advertisement is liable to be quashed.
(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by him and I find that the aforesaid decision has been taken as a policy matter by the State. Government after taking various factors into consideration. The State Government has found that it was necessary to amend the aforesaid Government Order and provide the period of working of Co-ordinator of Block Resource Centre and Co-coordinator of Nyay Panchayat Resource Centre for a period of two years only with a view to give chance to the new incumbents, who are more energetic and who may not involve in the corruption and other activities and the teachers, who have worked for a period of two years may engage themselves seriously in the teaching business and hence the period of two years is sufficient guideline and necessary factor. A letter has been written by the State Project Director on 4.5.2002 and the said letter has been taken into consideration for amending the Government order.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.