ANJANI KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri P.K. Sharma appearing for the respondents 2 and 4 as well as learned Standing Counsel of the State.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents for the purpose of making appointment on the post in question in Basic Primary School in view of the judgment dated 28 -8 -1998 passed in the writ petition No. 30711 of 1997 providing the benefits of the reservation to it being a backward class candidate or in the alternative on the post of Vyayam Visharad. The judgment relied upon by the petitioner namely passed in writ petition No. 30711 of 1997, which has been annexed as Annexure -I to the writ petition. The said judgment has been disposed of finally by a Division Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated June 11, 2000, which reads as under: The writ petition No. 30711 of 1997 from which the aforesaid special appeal has arisen and all other writ petitions of this Bunch are disposed of finally with the direction that C.P.Ed. candidates trained in State run institutions or recognised institutions by the State of U.P. or trained from any other institutions, which had been recognised equivalent to U.P. C.P.Ed. course shall be considered for appointment strictly in terms of the Government Orders dated 23 -3 -1995 and 28 -2 -1996. It is further provided that C.P.Ed. candidates who have obtained certificate from Amrawati shall also be considered on the basis of the judgment dated 11 -2 -1997 of Hon'ble Aloke Chakrabarti. J. In view of this judgment the petitioner who holds the certificate of 'Vyayam Visharad' and not of C.P.Ed., is not entitled for the benefit of the judgment passed in writ petition No. 30711 of 1997. The other points of learned Counsel for the petitioner in the circumstance of the Special Appeal do not arise for consideration. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
(3.) THE present recruitment is going on in pursuant to the advertisement for the year 2001 and the petitioner has no -where said that he has applied in pursuance to the advertisement of the year 2001. For this reason also the petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.;