- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for opposite parties. None present on behalf of O.P. No. 6. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 1.7.2009 passed by the District Magistrate, Kheri on the representation of the petitioner which was presented in compliance of the directions passed in writ petition No. 1901(SS) of 2009 Soni Devi v. State of U.P. and others.
(2.) Short controversy involved in this petition is that the petitioner applied for appointment as Shiksha Mitra in the year 2007 under handicapped quota. Opposite party No. 6 also applied for the same under the same category. The village Education Committee had recommended the name of the petitioner on the ground that she had secured 67% quality points marks after addition of 10% marks of disabled category and opposite party No. 6 had secured 59.5% quality point marks after addition of 10% marks of disabled category, on account of which the petitioner was selected. Opposite party No. 6 filed a writ petition before the High Court bearing No. 2579(SS) of 2008 Smt. Kamlesh v. State of U.P. and others, in which vide order dated 29.5.2008 this Court had directed as under : The controversy relates to disputed question of facts. No interference under Article 226of the constitution is warranted. However, the Basic Shiksha Adhikari is directed to look into the matter and decide the controversy in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order, expeditiously and preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the present order and communicate the decision to the parties. In compliance of the said order, the Basic Shiksha Adhikari decided the controversy vide order dated 30.1.2009 and allowed the appointment of opposite party No. 6 on the ground that the percentage of disability of Smt. Kamlesh was 75% while the disability percentage of the petitioner Km. Soni Devi was 40%. In the order, while disposing the representation, it was further observed that opposite party No. 6 was also unemployed while Km. Soni Devi was a student of B.A. III. Accordingly on the aforesaid ground preference was given to opposite party No. 6 in place of petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner herself filed writ petition No. 1901(SS) of 2009 in which this Court passed the following order : let the matter be placed before the concerned District Magistrate who will look into the claim of the petitioner as well as respondent No. 7 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari Mishra and pass appropriate order within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
(3.) Accordingly the matter was placed before the District Magistrate and the District Magistrate upheld the order passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari.;