- (1.) Heard Sri Sudhanshu Srivastava learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Siddharath Khare learned counsel for the respondent no.4. Both the counsel have argued this matter with ability and their assistance deserves to be acknowledged. Learned standing counsel has also argued for respondent nos.1, 2 and 3.
(2.) The petitioner no.1, i.e Committee of Management of Har Govind Kanya Junior High School, Khair, Aligarh along with petitioner no.2 have assailed the order dated 21.9.2006 and some other consequential orders in this writ petition. At the out set it may be observed that the petitioners strictly speaking are not an aggrieved party but they are certainly an interested party in relation to the impugned orders, therefore, the preliminary objection raised by the learned standing counsel that the petitioners not being aggrieved, do not have locus to maintain this writ petition, the objection is liable to be rejected.
(3.) Proceeding to hear the matter on merit, the first and fore most ground projected by the petitioner is to the effect that passing of the impugned order dated 21.9.2005 by respondent No.2 amounts to an exercise of power of review, inasmuch as, the impugned action nullifies the previous order passed by the same authority on 19.4.2005 whereby the appointment of respondent no.4 was held to be in contravention of the rule of reservation envisaged in U. P. Act No.4 of 1994.;