- (1.) HEAR leaned counsel for the petitioners, as well as Learned Standing Counsel .
(2.) IN both the petitions the petitioners have challenged the order dated 04.12.2010 passed by the District Magistrate, Sultanpur whereby promotion of Smt. Chandrika Pandey, the petitioner of writ petition No.7747 (SS) of 2010 has been cancelled as she did not fulfill the eligibility for promotion. On cancellation of promotion of Smt. Chandrika Pandey through writ petition No. 750 (SS) of 2011 the petitioner Smt. Sushila Devi has claimed his appointment being second in the merit list, whereas the same has been rejected by the same very order on the ground that there was no provision to keep maintain any such select list, after the promotion/selection on the post in question had been over. Smt. Chandrika Pandey, wife of Sri Deo Narayan Pandey, succeeded to get an appointment on the post of Anganbari Karyakatri claiming herself being below poverty line. Whereas on inquiry it was found that her husband was earning more than the income shown in the certificate. Therefore, her selection on the post of Anganbari Karyakatri was cancelled. Being aggrieved with which the petitioner instituted a writ petition No. 10244 (SS) of 2006 which was disposed of by means of order dated 13.12.2006 with the direction to the District Magistrate, to decide her representation. The District Magistrate vide order dated 1st of April 2007 rejected her representation on the ground that since the income of her husband was found Rs.2500/ - per month and thus his annual income was Rs.30,000/ -. Therefore, her income Certificate was cancelled and on account of which her selection made on the post of Anganbari Karyakatri on 02.07.2005 was also cancelled. Meanwhile, Smt. Chandrika Pandey instituted another writ petition No. 4289 (SS) of 2007, but did not disclose it before this Court in writ petition No. 2944 (SS) of 2007, therefore this Court dismissed the writ petition No. 2944 (SS) of 2007 with the cost of Rs.5,000/ -
(3.) THUS the claim of Smt. Chandrika Pandey, had already been adjudicated upon and since after inquiry her income certificate has been found forged, therefore her selection on the post of Anganbari Karyakatri being based on the said income certificate has been cancelled. So far as the claim of Smt. Sushila Devi, being the second one in the merit list for appointment on the post of Anganbari Karyakatri is concerned, it is stated that there was no provision to keep the select list, maintained for two years as the appointment of Smt. Chandrika Devi continued for two years. It is also settled position that once after selection the incumbent joins and due to some contingency if he/she leaves the post that post does not remain open to give appointment to another candidate on the same select list. The learned counsel appearing for the Smt. Chandrika Pandey also submitted that she submitted a resignation on 13th of September 2007, but since the same was not accepted, it was open for the respondents to consider her candidature for promotion to the post of Anganbari Karyakatri from the post of Assistant. Whereas, upon perusal of the records I find that the appointment of Smt. Sushila Devi on the post of Anganbari Karyakatri has been cancelled on different grounds. Therefore, I do not feel it necessary to enter into this controversy.;