- (1.) RAJIV Sharma, J. Heard Counsel for the appellant and the State Counsel.
(2.) THIS Special Appeal has been filed by Pratap Narain Pandey against the " judgment and order dated 7. 12. 2006 passed by brother S. S. Chauhan, J. in writ petition No. 9482 [ss] of 2006 thereby the learned Single Judge did not agree with the view expressed by brother S. N. Shukla, J. and observed that the matter requires reconsideration by a tarter Bench, In short, the facts of the case are that large numberof persons participated in theexamination/interviewforthe post of Collection Amin/seasonal Amin inthe year 1986, result of which was declared on 27. 4. 1986. On the basis of merit, a seleet list of 186 candidates was prepared and in due course, some of the candi dates were given appointment. As some of the candidates, whose name find place in the seleet list and were not given appointment, filed writ petitions which were disposed. of finally with the following order: "accordingly, both the writ petitions are allowed. The order dated 19. 9. 2000 is hereby quashed and a writ of mandamus is issued to the respondents to allow the petitioner to work as regular collection amin as he was duly se-lected under the Uttar Pradesh Collection Amin's Service Rules, 1974. It is made clear that the petitioner shall betreated asa regular Collection Amin in service since 5th June, 1986, for the purposes of seniority etc. except the salary for the period during which he did not work on the principle of 'no work, No pay'. There will be no order as to costs. " Candidates, similarly situated, filed writ petition No. 8672 of 2006 (SS) and other writ petitions and the same were disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order dated 19. 8. 2005.
(3.) DINESH Pratap Singh and another, petitioners in writ petition No. 9482 [ss] of 2006 claimed that the benefit of judgment and order dated 19. 8. 2005 passed in writ petition No. 4031 (SS) of 2001 may also be given to them. When the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 9482 (SS) of 2006 came up for orders, brother S. S. Chauhan J. , found himself unable to agree with the view ex-pressed in writ petition No. 4031 (SS) of 2001 and formulated a question, which read says under: "the question as to whether a waiting list/select list will remain valid beyond a period of one year is the moot question to be decided in this reference".;