A.P.SAHI, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Maurya for the Board.
(2.) IT is submitted that the petitioner is a selected candidate and it would be unreasonable to deny him the benefit of extension of the period for joining for which he has prayed in his application. The petitioner contends that he is still ready to join and that the impugned order dated 15.10.2009 deserves to be set aside. Sri S.R. Singh learned counsel for the Board contends that the period of joining is prescribed under the rules and he has invited the attention of the Court to Rule 13 of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board Rules, 1998. The same is quoted below: "13. Intimation of names of selected candidates-(1) The Inspector shall, within ten days of the receipt of the panel and the allocation of institution under Rule 12- (i) notify it on the notice-board of his office; (ii) intimate the name of selected candidate to the Management of the institution, which has notified the vacancy, with the director, that , on authorization under resolution of the management, an order of appointment, in the proforma given in Appendix "E" be issued to the candidate by registered post within fifteen days of the receipt of intimation requiring him to join duty within fifteen days of the receipt of the order or within such extended time, as maybe allowed to him by the Management, and also intimating him that on his failure to join within the specified time, his appointment will be liable to be cancelled; (iii) send an intimation to the candidate, referred to in clause (ii), with the direction to report to the Manager within fifteen days of the receipt of the order of appointment by him from the Manager or within such extended time as may be allowed to him, by the Management. ........................." Sri Singh on the strength of the aforesaid rule contends that as a matter of fact the petitioner was granted ample time and he failed to join and further from a perusal of his application dated 7.9.2009 he has prayed for further six months time. He submits that after having waited for a reasonable period the impugned order has been passed which does not suffer from any infirmity and does not call for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the Board and perused the rules. The same provides that the proforma as provided under Appendix E has to be filled up by the management and the letter of appointment has to be issued with an intimation to the candidate to join within a period of 15 days or within such extended time as may be allowed him by the management in the institution. It is the admitted position that the petitioner had been unable to join on account of his family circumstances. He has further prayed for six months time to join the institution. The Court does not find any valid reason except a bald and vague averment of family circumstances so as to justify further extension of time. Further the time earlier provided has to be reasonably construed.;