SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 3, Sri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and Sri N.K. Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no.5.
(2.) After a requisition was made by the respondent no.4 institution, an advertisement no. 1 of 2004 was issued by the respondent No.2 inviting applications for recruitment of Assistant Teacher in Physical Education. Thus the vacancy existing in the respondent no.4 Institution was included in the advertisement no.1 of 2004. Pursuant to this advertisement respondent no.5 applied and he was allotted the roll no.081620680. He appeared in written examination as well as interview. The result was declared which was published in newspaper. The respondent no.5 secured 334.2 marks which was above the cut of select marks 331.60. Since the respondent no.5 was not given appointment and as such he filed writ petition no.68954 of 2005 (Jagbir Singh v. State of U.P. and another) , which was disposed of by order dated 7.11.2005 as under: "Heard Sri K.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents no.1 and 3; Sri R.S. Parihar has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.2. The contention of the petitioner is that in spite of the fact that the petitioner has obtained higher marks than the cut off merit as is evident from Annexure VI to the writ petition, yet the petitioner has been extended the benefit of placement and appointment presumably on account of the fact that the degree in Physical Education possessed by the petitioner is recognised. The contention of the petitioner, is recognised. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has obtained his trainee degree from Rani Bai Agnihotri Sharirik Shikshan Mahavidyalaya, Vardha (Maharashtra), which Institution is affiliated to the Nagpur University. Sri A.K. Yadav has also been herd on behalf of the Board and he intimated that the matter has already been considered by the Board and representative degrees of such institutions have also been verified and decisions are being taken on such candidatures, which are similar to that to the petitioner. The petitioner's candidature is likely to be scrutinized very shortly and decision thereon shall also be intimated to him as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before the Board. The petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.2 to take a decision with respect of the claim of the petitioner in view of the facts stated herein above within the aforesaid period and intimate about the decision to the petitioner accordingly."
(3.) Consequently, the matter was re-examined by the respondent no.2 Board and the respondent no.5 was selected as per list published on 12.12.2005. The respondent no.5 was allocated the respondent no.4-Institution. After due verification order dated 17.3.2006 was issued by the respondent no.2 Board whereby the verification particulars of the respondent no.5 was sent to the D.I.O.S., Gautam Budh Nagar. Thereafter, the respondent no.4 issued an appointment letter No.NSCB/M/1010607, dated 20.4.2006 to the respondent no.5 who joined the duties as Assistant Teacher, Physical Education on 24.4.2006 in the respondent no.4 Institution. Thus the appointment of the respondent no.5 has been made in accordance with law and it does suffer from any legal infirmity.;