Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 23.1.2007 passed by respondent No. 1 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition), cancelling the entire selection of Aganbari Karyakarti/Sahayika in district Mau, to place all the concerned Bal Vikas Pariyojana Adhikari/District Programme Officer under suspension and also to lodge First Information Report in the matter; the order dated 2.2.2007, consequential one, issued by the Director, Bal Vikas Sewa Evam Pushtahar, U.P. Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "Director'), annexure-11 to the writ petition, communicating the cancellation of above selection in 9 projects of District Mau, and the order dated 8.2.2007, annexure-12 to the writ petition, consequential order issued by District Programme Officer, Mau for compliance of State Government's order dated 23.1.2007 and Director's order dated 2.2.2007. The facts in brief as stated are that the District Programme Officer, Mau issued an advertisement on 5.6.2006, inviting applications by 20.6.2006 for appointment of Aganbari Karyakrti/Sahayika in 9 projects in district Mau. The details of the selection, project-wise is as under: JUDGEMENT_747_ADJ2_2011Image1.jpg The petitioner Nos. 1 to 11 applied for the post of Aganbari Karykarti and petitioner Nos. 12 to 21 applied for Aganbari Sahayika. The selections were made and thereafter appointment letters were issued to the petitioners on 24.7.2006, Copies whereof collectively have been filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. The petitioners claimed to have joined their duties except petitioner Nos. 10 and 11 i.e. Smt. Geeta Devi and Smt. Sanju Devi.
(3.) IT appears that several complaints were received by respondents in respect of above selection, hence, vide letter dated 1.8.2006, Secretary, Women Welfare and Child Development directed for freezing of the entire selection at the stage it was and not to issue any appointment letter further. Thereafter, on 29.8.2006 decision was taken for cancellation of selection and to make a fresh and also to place the concerned officials under suspension. The consequential order was issued by Director on 31.8.2006 for compliance of the State Government's order dated 29.8.2006. IT appears that District Magistrate sent a letter dated 31.8.2008 recommending that cancellation of entire selection does not appear to be justified and in respect to individual erroneous selections separate action be taken. The aforesaid order dated 29.8.2006 issued by State Government and consequential order dated 31.8.2006 of Director were challenged before this Court in a number of writ petitions. The leading writ petition No. 50346 of 2006, Smt. Meera Pandey and Others v. State of U.P. and others, was allowed vide judgment dated 26.9.2006 with the following directions: "Consequently, writ petition succeed, and are allowed. Impugned orders are quashed. However, passing of this order will not prevent the respondents from undertaking inquiry as has already been directed, and the selections made, shall abide by final outcome of the enquiry." Consequently, the Director issued an order on 14.11.2006 stating that in view of the decision of this Court in writ petition No. 50346 of 2006, Smt. Meera Pandey and others (Supra), the Director's letter dated 31.8.2006 be treated as non est. The two members committee was constituted by the Government to make necessary inquiry into the matter as also noticed by Hon'ble Single Judge in his judgment dated 26.9.2006. The Committee submitted its report on 27.12.2006. It has considered individual cases of the selected candidates as well as procedure of selection and entire record and has noticed that besides the procedural irregularities in individual matters, out of 38 Aganbari Karykarti selected, 32 selections were tainted. Similarly out of 32 Aganbari Sahayika selected, 18 cases were tainted. Accordingly, the committee consisting of Special Secretary, Bal Vikas Sewa Evam Pushtahar, U.P. Lucknow and Additional Director, Bal Vikas Sewa Evam Pushtahar, Directorate, U.P. Lucknow recommended that selections found tainted be only cancelled and other selectees may be allowed to join after verification of their testimonials. For the cancelled post of selection, fresh selection was recommended. The State Government considered the report and also considered that more than 50 per cent were found tainted. The Government decided to cancel the entire selection and to proceed afresh. Consequently, the impugned orders have been issued which are challenged in this writ petition.;