MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri R. K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Santosh Kumar Chaubey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vimlesh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4.?
(2.) BY means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 02.12.2014 passed by the respondent no.4 as well as impugned order dated 28.01.2014 passed by the respondent no.5.
(3.) SRI R. K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate submits that in identical facts and circumstances same impugned order has been assailed in Service Single No. 7312 of 2014 (Rakesh Pratap Singh and 5 others) and other 4 connected writ petitioners. The said writ petition has been allowed vide order dated 18.12.2014 passed by Hon'ble High Court, Lucknow. The operative portion of the order is reproduced herein below: - ".....After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the impugned termination orders are liable to be quashed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. The impugned orders visit the petitioners with grave civil consequences. Thus, I am of the considered opinion that these orders could not have been passed without opportunity of hearing. Accordingly, termination orders dated 2.12.2014 impugned in various writ petitions are quashed. As agreed by learned counsel for respondents no.1, 2 and 3, it shall now be open to the Nigam to pass fresh orders, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. While doing so, the Nigam shall keep in mind, the scope and power of respondent no.4 in issuing directions under U.P. State Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1996 and the law laid down by this Court in the case of Professor Banarasi Tripathi . The Nigam shall also specifically consider whether the selection under different category was held on basis of common question paper or not and whether switching over of candidates from one category to another category is permissible or not and whether the reserved category candidates, who have allegedly qualified under the general category, could be adjusted against the remaining vacancies or not. The aforesaid exercise be carried out as far as possible within two months from today Subject to aforesaid observations/directions, writ petitions stand allowed to the extent indicated above." Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in view of the order passed by learned Single Judge, the department had passed subsequent order dated 02.01.2014, by which earlier termination order passed against the petitioners were withdrawn, the same has been brought on record as Annexure No. 1 to the counter affidavit.;