H.L.GOKHALE, J. - (1.) HEARD Dr. YK. Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the appellants. Mr. G.K. Singh, learned Counsel appears for the respondents.
(2.) THE appeal involves a short determination of facts. The case of the respondents in this appeal before the learned Single Judge was that they were selected as Seenchpal in the year 1996 and some persons had been selected in an earlier list in 1987. The persons from the 1987 list had been appointed as also two more persons from the 1996 list and, therefore, they ought to be appointed. The learned Judge has accepted this submission of the respondents and granted a writ of mandamus directing the appellants to give appointment to these persons.
(3.) DR . Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the appellants has drawn our attention to paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit which was filed before the learned Single Judge with a clear assertion that none of the persons selected in the list of 1987 or in the second list of 1996 had been given appointment. A list had also been annexed and the second list is the same as the list given by the respondents herein.;