SANJAY MISRA,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Sanjay Kumar Sharma learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 Sri Anuj Kumar for respondent No. 4 and Sri Nafees Ahmad for respondent No. 5.
(2.) THE petitioner alleges that an advertisement was issued in the year 2006 for selection of Shiksha Mitra at primary school Timardass Sambhal Nagar, District Moradabad for the session 2006-07 and the petitioner had applied for the same. In a resolution dated 2.12.2006 of the Village Education Committee one Puja Vyas was recommended for selection however prior to her appointment her selection was cancelled due to irregularities and the petitioner was recommended in her place by resolution dated 11.9.2007. It is stated that in a second resolution dated 27.10.2008 passed by the Village Education Committee the petitioner was again recommended but no appointment was given to the petitioner and hence he approached the District Magistrate for redressal of his grievance. It is further stated that the Basic Shiksha Adhikari has issued an advertisement dated 4.12.2008 for the session 2008-09 with respect to several primary schools including the primary school at Timardass Sambhal Nagar, Moradabad. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra. Learned counsel for the respondent have submitted that according to the averments made by the petitioner the selection for Shiksha Mitra was held for the session 2006-07 wherein the first candidate namely Puja Vyas was selected but her selection was cancelled and in her place the petitioner's name was recommended by the resolution dated 11.9.2007. According to them the petitioner was not given appointment and a second resolution was passed by the Village Education Committee on 27.10.2008 recommending the petitioner. The respondents state that admittedly no appointment was made on the post of Shiksha Mitra for the primary school Timardass Sambhal Nagar, Moradabad for the session 2006-07 and now the advertisement for the session 2008-09 has been issued by the authorities. Therefore according to them when the term of Shiksha Mitra is only for eleven months in a session and on payment of honorarium the petitioner cannot claim any right of appointment on the post for a session for which no selection has been held till today and in so far as the session 2006-07 is concerned no appointment having been made the session has expired and petitioner cannot claim any appointment thereupon.
(3.) HAVING considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record the fact pleaded by the petitioner is that the advertisement was issued in the year 2006 relating to the session 2006-07. Admittedly neither the petitioner nor the first candidate namely Puja Vyas were given appointment and there have been two resolutions passed by the Village Education Committee on 11.9.2007 and 27.10.2008 in favour of the petitioner. Once the session 2006-07 has expired whether the authorities will be within their rights to appoint a person selected for an earlier year in the subsequent year where no selection has been held. In the present case admittedly the authority has issued an advertisement on 4.12.2008 for the session 2008-09 which clearly indicates that a fresh selection for the session is to be made and therefore it would not be appropriate for this court to interfere in the process of fresh selection in this writ petition by directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as a Shiksha Mitra during the session 2008-09 by virtue of a selection held for the session 2006-07. Under such circumstances when the advertisement has been issued the petitioner will have a fresh chance by applying for selection for the session 2008-09.;