Dilip Kumar Seth, J. - (1.) IT is alleged that the petitioners were included in the list of candidates to be sent for training for the purpose of appointment in the post Village Development Officer by different District Selection Committees. The Commissioner had prepared a merit list after compiling all the lists sent by different districts and thereby prepared another list and in order of merit the persons were being sent for training. The petitioners have challenged the said selection list prepared by the Commissioner on the ground that their names were not sent for training because of the reason that their names figured lower in the said list prepared by the Commissioner. Similar question arose in the case of Adil Rashid Khan v. District Development Officer, Budaun and others : (1996 (2) L.B.E.S.R. 812). In the said case, a Division Bench of this Court had held that it is not envisaged within the power of the Commissioner to prepare a list of candidates for training other than the list received from different District Selection Committees. The Commissioner is empowered only to prepare a merit list of candidates on completion of training on the basis of the aggregate marks secured in the training. It was specifically held in the said case as follows: - - 8. From the discussions in the foregoing paragraphs, the resultant position that emerges is that the action of the Commissioner in preparing the list of candidates for training by passing/ignoring the list received by him from different District Selection Committees (Budaun, Banda and Bijnor) was contrary to the rules and hence incompetent and invalid. Consequently, it follows that the denial of opportunity of training to the appellants on the basis of such illegal list prepared by the Commissioner is unsustainable. 9. The question that remains to be considered is as to what is the appropriate order that can be passed in the case? the selection of the appellants was made by the respective selection committee in 1993, in the meantime almost three years have elapsed. The posts, which were advertised, have been filled up by other candidates. In the circumstances, we consider it apt and proper to direct the respondents, particularly the Commissioner, Rural Development U.P. Lucknow to send the appellants for training in the next batch of trainees and consider their case for appointment in accordance with the provisions of Rule 16 of the Rules.
(2.) THE present case being identical in facts with those of the said case of Adil Rashid Khan (supra) squarely comes within the purview of the said decision. Accordingly, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed to the extent as indicated in paragraph No. 9 of the said decision quoted above. There shall be no order as to costs.;