- (1.) VINEET Saran, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to send the petitioner for training for the post of Shiksha Mitra and also to appoint him as Shiksha Mitra for the primary school in question. It is the case of the petitioner that applications for appointment of Shiksha Mitra for the current Session 2002-03 were invited and the same were required to be submitted from 8th April to 20th April, 2002. On 20-4-2002 the meeting of the Gram Shiksha Samiti was held in which eight applications were considered. Admittedly highest quality points were obtained by one Grish Chandra who could not be selected because he was below the age of 18 years. respondent No. 5 Manoj Kumar obtained the second highest quality points whereas the petitioner Bhanu Pratap Singh was fourth in order of merit. It has been contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that two persons placed at Serial Nos. 2 and 3 in order of merit had higher quality points than that of the petitioner but they had not submitted their domicile certificate by the last date. It is not the case of the petitioner that the domicile certificate submitted subsequently by respondent No. 5 Manoj Kumar who was placed second in order of merit was incorrect. Sri R. B. Tripathi, learned Counsel appearing for contesting respondent No. 2 Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad, has placed the original record before and a perusal of the same makes it clear that the domicile certificate submitted by the respondent No. 5 is dated 23-4-2002. It has been submitted by Sri Tripathi that the said certificate is genuine and since the respondent No. 5 had obtained the highest quality points from amongst those who were found eligible for appointment as Shiksha Mitra, he has been so appointed. Since it is not disputed that the application of the respondent No. 5 had been filed well within time and in case if some certificate was lacking and the said respondent had furnished the same within the time granted and the same is found to be correct and is not disputed by any of the parties, the application of said person if accepted would not amount to any illegality or irregularity.
(3.) IN such view of the matter the appointment of respondent No. 5 having been made is fully justified as he was at the top in order of merit from amongst those applicants who were qualified as per the Government Order dated 1-7-2000 relating to the appointment of Shiksha Mitra. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall however, be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed. .;