- (1.) O. P. Jain, J. Petitioner, Budhi Prakash Badoni, his filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for a direction in the nature of certiorari to quash impugned notice An-nexure '4' dated 12th January, 1987. He fur ther prays for a mandamus commanding the respondents not to appoint Deokinandan Tiwari, respondent No. 4, in pursuance of the impugned recommendation dated 12th January, 1987 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (hereinafter called the Commission ). He has further prayed that a mandamus be issued to the respondents not to interfere in the working of the petitioner on the post of Exploration As sistant in Uttar Pradesh State Ar chaeological Organisation.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the Commission issued an advertisement Annexure '3' for the post of two Explora tion Assistants-one for Archaeological unit at Almora and one for Archaeological unit at Gart 1. THE minimum qualifica tion requiiv,- for the post was Post Graduate Degree in Ancient Indian His tory and Culture with Archaeology. Another essential qualification for eligibility was a Diploma from National School of Archaeology OR two years ex perience of exploration in Archaeology or Survey. In pursuance of this advertisement the petitioner, respondent No. 4and several other persons sent applications and same of them were called for interview which was held on 23rd December, 1986. THE result of the interview was declared on 12th January, 1987, which is Annexure '4' to the petition. Respondent No. 4 Deokinandan Tiwari was declared first and one Krishna Kumar Singh was at serial No. 2 Petitioner, Budhi Prakash Badoni was placed in the waiting list. The petitioner made a repre sentation to the Secretary of the Commis sion on 29th January, 1987 and a copy of the same is Annexure '5' to the petition. In this representation the petitioner sub mitted that respondent No. 4 Deokinan dan Tiwari who has been selected by the Commission does not possess even the minimum qualification for the post of Ex ploration Assistant. Having failed to get any relief from the respondents, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the prayers mentioned above.
(3.) NOTICES were issued to the respon dents. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Commission, another counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 4 Deokinandan Tiwari and a counter-affidavit has also been filed by respondent No. 2 Director, Cultural Affairs, Lucknow. We have heard Sri A. K. Yog, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri A. K. Shukla, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent Nos. 2 and 3, Sri G. C. Pant learned Counsel representing respondent No. 4 and Sri V. M. Sahai learned Counsel representing the Com mission.;