- (1.) THE writ petitioners-appellants, aggrieved by the order dated 5.3.2009, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.1512 (SS) of 2009, have preferred this appeal under Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules.
(2.) SHORT facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the writ petitioners-appellants (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) alongwith respondents 5 to 9 were candidates for appointment to a Class IV post in Jawaharlal Nehru Intermediate College, situated in the District of Unnao. The petitioners filed writ application earlier, inter alia, alleging that relatives of the Principal, Members of the Committee of Management as well as District Inspector of Schools are candidates for appointment and they are not eligible. It was further alleged that all those relatives have been recommended for appointment. Aforesaid writ application was registered as Writ Petition No.616 (SS) of 2009 (Ravi Kant and another versus Joint Director of Education, VI Region, Lucknow and others). By order dated 27th of January, 2009, this court disposed of the writ application with a direction to the Joint Director to look into the aforesaid allegation of the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that in the light of the aforesaid order, they filed representation specifically alleging the relationship between the selected candidates and the Principal and the Members of the Committee of Management. In the light of the order of this court, the Joint Director considered the matter and by order dated 13.2.2009, recorded a finding that selected candidates are not related either to the District Inspector of Schools, Principal of the School or the Committee of Management of the School. Petitioners challenged the aforesaid order in the writ application, which has been dismissed by the impugned order. While dismissing the writ application, this court observed as follow:- "Be that as it may, since it is a disputed question of fact, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.
(3.) HOWEVER, it is incumbent upon the authority to look into it that the persons appointed have been appointed after the prescribed procedure as provided in law and they are within the prescribed age." It is the case of the petitioners that before taking decision, they were not associated with the enquiry.;