Dilip Gupta, J. - (1.) THE petitioners, who had submitted applications for being considered for appointment on the post of Livestock Extension Officer pursuant to the advertisement dated 29th December, 2004 issued by the Joint Director (Administration), Animal Husbandry, U.P. Lucknow, have filed this petition for quashing the order dated 23rd December, 2009 passed by the Director, Department of Animal Husbandry by which a direction has been issued to permit only 489 selected candidates oat of the 630 selected candidates who had been sent for two years training to appear at the examination to be conducted after completion of the two years training so that appointment orders could be issued to them.
(2.) THE advertisement provided that the application forms for the 489 posts of Livestock Extension Officer could be submitted by 17th January, 2005 and after selection but before appointment on the said post, two years' training would be imparted. A perusal of the advertisement also shows that the posts of Livestock Extension Offi Prem Singh and others v. Haryana State Electricity Board and othe1996) 4 SCC 319 erned Region was the Appointing Authority; that the post was a Group 'C' post falling outside the purview of the U.P. Public Service Commission and that the number of vacancies could increase or decrease. The process of selection, including the holding of the written examination under the provisions of the U.P. Animal Husbandry Department of Livestock Extension and Poultry Development Service Rules, 2002 notified on 16th July, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Animal Husbandry Rules') was assailed by certain applicants in various writ petitions on the ground that the selection could have been done only in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the provisions of "Uttar Pradesh Procedure for Direct Recruitment for Group 'C Post (Outside the Purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission), Rules, 2002" (hereinafter referred to as the 'Public Service Commission 2002 Rules') as subsequently amended by "The Uttar Pradesh Procedure for Direct Recruitment for Group "C Posts (Outside the Purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission) (First Amendment) Rules, 2003. The writ petitions were allowed and the written examination held on 11th September, 2005 was cancelled for the reason that the selection could have been made only in accordance with the provisions of Public Service Commission 2002 Rules. The relevant portion of the judgment rendered by the Court on 21 st March, 2006 in Satish Kumar Yadav and others v. State of U.P and another, 2006 (3) ESC 1792, is as follows : "From the facts which have been noticed herein above, it is not in dispute that the advertisement for making appointment on the post of Livestock Extension Officer was published on 29th December, 2004. On the date the advertisement was published, the only rules inforce for regulating the appointments on Group 'C' posts in the State of U.P. were the U.P. Procedure for Direct Recruitment for Group 'C Posts (Out Side the Purview of U.P. Public Service Commission) Rules, 2002. It is settled law that the process of selection commences with the issuance of advertisement inviting applications for appointment. The date so notified is the crucial date for determining the procedure and the rules, which are to be applied for the said selections. Any new set of rules or any subsequent amendments to the existing rules will have prospective application only and cannot be applied for the purposes of making selections in pursuance of the advertisement which was published earlier.......... In view of the aforesaid settled legal position, U. P. Animal Husbandry Department Livestock Extension and Poultry Development Service Rules, 2002, which have been enforced after publication in official gazette only on 16th July, 2005, will have no application so far as the process of selections qua the advertisement dated 29th December, 2004 is concerned. Therefore the entire written examination conducted by the respondents in alleged compliance of Rule 15 of U.P. Animal Husbandry Department Livestock Extension and Poultry Development Service Rules, 2002 (notified on 16th July, 2005) is patently illegal and unsustainable in the eyes of law. The respondents were under legal obligation to complete the process of selections initiated under the advertisement dated 29th December, 2004 in accordance with the rules applicable i. e. U. P. Procedure for Direct Recruitment for Group 'C' Posts (Out Side the Purview of U.P. Public Service Commission) Rules, 2002 and in strict adherence thereto. In view of the aforesaid, this Court has no hesitation to record that the written examination which have taken place on 11.9.2005 pursuant to the advertisement dated 29th December, 2004 cannot be legally sustained and the same is accordingly quashed. Respondents are directed to complete the process of selection with reference to the advertisement dated 29th December, 2004 in accordance with law as applicable on the date the advertisement was published, at the earliest possible. Writ petitions are allowed subject to the observations made herein above." (emphasis supplied) Subsequently, the selection was made in accordance with the Public Service Commission 2002 Rules as amended in 2003 and after publication of the select list, 630 candidates including the petitioners were sent for two years training to four different training centres in two batches. Such training of two years was necessary in terms of the advertisement which provided that the appointments shall be made only after the two years' training is imparted. In this connection, the Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry passed an order on 17th August, 2006 directing the candidates of the first batch to report for training on 21st August, 2006. The training of the second batch commenced from 7th October, 2006 as was notified by the Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry by the order dated 27th September, 2006. The two years training for both the batches was imparted to the 630 selected candidates and it concluded on 18th August, 2008 and 6th October, 2008.
(3.) THE Principal Secretary, Government of U.P. by the letter dated 22nd September, 2008 then issued directions to the Director, Department of Animal Husbandry for holding the examination at the earliest after examining the certificates produced by the candidates at the time of selection. However, as examination was not held, certain writ petitions were filed but thereafter an order dated 23rd December, 2009 was issued by the Director, Department of Animal Husbandry directing that the examination of only 489 selected candidates shall be held and they shall be given appointments after the process is completed by 31st January, 2010. The issuance of the letter dated 23rd December, 2009, therefore, deprived 141 candidates who had completed two years training from appearing at the written examination as 630 selected candidates had been sent for the two years' training. The petitioners are such of those selected candidates who have been excluded from appearing at the written examination.;