Sunil Ambwani - (1.) -Heard Sri Ashok Khare, senior advocate, assisted by Sri A. K. Singh in Writ Petition Nos. 19367 of 2003, 19045 of 2003 and 18791 of 2003, Sri Ghanshyam Dwivedi in Writ Petition No. 20213 of 2003 and Sri Ramendra Asthana in Writ Petition No. 20150 of 2003, and learned standing counsel for respondents in the above writ petition.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to these writ petitions are stated as below : In Writ Petition Nos. 19367 of 2003, 19045 of 2003 and 18791 of 2003, petitioners applied in pursuance of advertisement in newspaper 'Dainik Jagran' dated 30.8.2001, for appointment to Group C posts under U. P. (Outside the Purview of Public Service Commission) Procedure for Direct Recruitment Group 'C' Posts Rules, 2001. All the petitioners applied for 54 advertised vacancies of Junior Clerks ; 14 for typists and 8 of Apprentice Clerks in the Government Press, Allahabad, for which appointing authority is the Joint Director, Government Press, Allahabad. Whereas the minimum qualification for the posts of Junior Clerks was provided to be Intermediate, and for the posts of Typists, the minimum qualification prescribed as Intermediate with proficiency in typing 25 words per minute in Hindi. THE advertisement was published under the authority of Chief Development Officer/Chairman District Selection Committee (Group C), Allahabad. In Writ Petition No. 18791 of 2003, petitioners 1, 2, 5 and 6 belong to general category, petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 belong to other backward class, and petitioner No. 5 claims reservation as dependent of Freedom Fighter. In Writ Petition No. 19045 of 2003 also both petitioners belong to general category and in Writ Petition No. 19367 of 2003, both petitioners belong to general category. All the petitioners applied for all the three posts and in column 7 (b) of the application form, they disclosed that they are proficient in typing. A written examination was held on 7.10.2001. The result was published on 25.11.2001. All the petitioners qualified in the written examination. A Writ Petition No. 32799 of 2001, Ashok Kumar v. State of U. P. was filed challenging the Constitution of Selection Committee for filling up the posts in Government Press in which interim order was passed on 9.10.2001, restraining the respondents to proceed with selections. Subsequently by order dated 3.1.2002, it was clarified that the stay order dated 9.10.2001 was limited for the posts of typist in Government Press and did not operate with regard to other posts. All the petitioners were called for appearing in type test which was scheduled to be held on 5/6.12.2001. In the communication calling petitioners for type test, it was clarified that the candidates who will appear in typing/ stenography test, will nevertheless be included for consideration for the post in which the knowledge of typist was not necessary and will be considered on their merit position. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 in Writ Petition No. 19045 of 2003 appeared in type test. The remaining petitioners in this writ petition did not appear. The petitioners in both the Writ Petitions No. 19045 of 2003 and No. 19367 of 2003 did not participate in type test. The entire selection process was stopped on account of a Radiogram of 21.2.2001, issued by the Government Order dated 29.4.2002, in pursuance of the undertaking given on behalf of State Government and thereafter under the order of the Apex Court in Writ Petition No. 488 of 2001, Akhil Bharat Varshiya Chhatra Yuva Berojgar Front v. State of U. P. and others. Thereafter by U. P. Act No. 1 of 2002, the amendments providing for reservations to most backward classes were deleted. A number of writ petitions were filed before this Court for concluding the selection process. In Writ Petition No. 31852 of 2002, Ajit Kumar Singh v. State of U. P., while allowing writ petition on 4.10.2002 a direction was issued to complete the selection process. A special appeal against the said judgment was filed before the Supreme Court on 7.2.2003 which was withdrawn for availing remedy of special appeal. A Special Appeal No. 120 of 2003 filed thereafter is still pending. In pursuance of the statement given in Contempt Petition No. 502 of 2003 the State Government issued a Radiogram dated 5.4.2003, for completing the selection process. Even though the selections for 54 posts of Junior Clerks in Government Press was stopped, the result was declared for 52 posts. When these writ petitions were filed, the Court noticed that there are 8 petitioners in Writ Petition No. 18791 of 2003 and 19045 of 2003, and a direction was issued that the 8 candidates who stand at bottom, of the select list shall not be offered appointment. It was made clear that the Court is not interfering in the selection process. Learned standing counsel requested for time to file counter-affidavit, which was extended on 7.5.2003, 22.5.2003 and thereafter on 7.8.2003. Since it is a matter arising out of Allahabad, this Court took strong exception for further extension of time and imposed cost of Rs. 5,000 to adjourn the case which was deposited on 13.8.2003. At this stage it is pertinent to state that on 22.5.2003 when all these matters were taken up Sri H. P. Upadhyay, Additional Standing Counsel prayed for further time for filing counter-affidavit. On a request made by counsel for petitioner to stay the appointment, following order was passed by this Court on 22.5.2003 : "Inspite of time granted to counter-affidavit has been filed. Sri H. P. Upadhyay, Additional Standing Counsel prays for and is granted three weeks further time to file counter-affidavit. List all these connected cases on 15.7.2003. Sri Upadhyay states that on account of modernisation of the Government Press and in order to accommodate retrenched employees the department is considering the number of appointments to be made and that no appointment shall be made until the next date of hearing. In view of the aforesaid statement, no interim order is required to be passed in these matters. List on 15.7.2003."
(3.) IT appears that inspite of the aforesaid assurance given to this Court, respondents offered appointment to the candidates out of the select list, leaving only 8 posts. Since these appointment letters were issued against an assurance given by the respondents to this Court, and were made during the pendency of the writ petition, the Court did not consider it proper to implead all the appointees to decide the rights of petitioners, and has proceeded to decide the case in absence of these appointees. Counter affidavits have been filed. All the counsels agreed that no rejoinder-affidavits are required to be submitted, and have addressed the Court on merits. With the consent of all the parties under the Rules of the Court these writ petitions are being decided at this stage.;