NATHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-1991-4-139
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 02,1991

NATHAN LAL Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.A. Sharma, J. - (1.) IN 1984 a test was held for selection of seenchpals in irrigation department, in which the petitioner and other 34 candidates were successful and out of 35 candidates, selected in the test. In the list of 35 candidates the name of petitioner was placed at Serial No. 11. Out of 35 candidates mentioned in the list 34 have already been appointed, but unfortunately petitioner has not been appointed so far. It is further alleged by the petitioner that few other persons who were not in the list have also been appointed, although they were not selected by the selection committee and petitioner's name has been left out on account of extraneous considerations and without any justification. On 6 -4 -1990 a month's time was granted to the learned standing counsel to file counter -affidavit, but no counter -affidavit was filed, on 4 -1 -1991 three weeks, further time and no more was granted to learned standing counsel to file counter -affidavit. But no counter affidavit has been filed so far. In the absence of any counter -affidavit the allegations made in the writ petition are liable to be accepted, as correct.
(2.) IT has been specifically averred by the petitioner that he was duly selected in the test and was placed at serial No. 11 in the list of selected candidates copy of which has been filed as Annexure 3 to the writ petition. Out of 34 candidates appointed, most of them were placed below the name of the petitioner and were junior to him. It has further been averred that some outsiders have also been appointed, who were not selected by the selection committee. It is further stated that there is no justification, rhyme or reason for not appointing the petitioner as seenchpal and action of the respondents was arbitrary. In the absence of any contest by way of filing counter -affidavit, the averments made in the petition, are accepted. The writ petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondent to pass appropriate order regarding appointment of the petitioner, as Seenchpal, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.;


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