UMESHWAR PANDEY, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, a candidate duly selected and recommended for appointment as District Panchayat Raj Officer in the Uttar Pradesh Combined State Subordinate Services Examination, 1999, has come up to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: (i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue a letter of appointment/posting to petitioner as the District Panchayat Raj Officer. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to ensure that the petitioner's prayer for appointment/posting as District Panchayat Raj Officer is considered. (iii) issue a writ, order or direction of suitable nature holding that the petitioner is entitled to have the notional seniority with effect from the date when similarly situated candidates have been given appointments. (iv) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) award the cost of petition in favour of the petitioner.
(2.) IT is contended that the petitioner Akhilesh Kumar Singh appeared in the examination with Roll No. 012828, conducted by Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission. After qualifying for the interview he got finally selected regarding which the Newspaper Notifications dated 7th May, 2000 were published vide Annexures -I and II. He had given preference for the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer and in the result he was shown to have been notified as selected for the said post. The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission on the basis of the aforesaid result sent its recommendation to the respondent No. 1 whereafter petitioner's police verification and medical examination were also got done by November, 2000. He had been waiting for the appointment call, which he did not receive. It is alleged that the respondents have absolutely no justification not to give appointment to the petitioner. As many as ten candidates were notified as selected for the vacant posts of District Panchayat Raj Officer but out of them only four (two general category, one other backward class and one scheduled caste category) were offered appointments and they have joined. The backward class and scheduled caste candidates, given appointments in pursuance of the competitive examination, are below in the merit list to the petitioner. The remaining six posts of District Panchayat Raj Officer covered by the advertisement issued for holding examination and subsequent selection, being still in existence, there is no justification on the part of the respondents either to abolish those posts or to cancel the selection of the remaining six successful candidates. It is further contended that since there was delay in the appointment of the petitioner, he made a representation (Annexure -III) to the respondents on 23rd May, 2002. Another representation vide Annexure -IV dated 3 -6 -2002 was also preferred by him but no response was given to it by the respondents. He thereafter, made a representation to the Chief Minister vide letter dated 15 -6 -2002 (Annexure -V). Later on, on 5 -10 -2002 a detailed representation was made by the petitioner to the Principal Secretary (Karmik), Government of Uttar Pradesh requesting him to issue necessary orders for the appointment. A representation on the same date was also sent to the Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj, Uttar Pradesh Government vide Annexure -VII. Thereafter, the petitioner got informal information that so long as the quota of reserved category candidates is filled up, no one from the general category would be appointed to the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer.
(3.) IN para -15 of the writ petition, it is further contended that the persons below in merit in the select list of the competitive examination have been given appointment on different posts but the petitioner has been ignored. On account of the inaction on the part of the respondents the petitioner has not received the appointment letter to the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer to which he is fully entitled. The said appointment is being withheld by the respondent without any justifiable rhyme and reason. It is alleged that under law, respondents are legally bound to issue appointment order to the petitioner and hence, the petitioner finding no other remedy, has to approach this Court with the aforesaid prayers.;