Sangeeta Chandra, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuing a mandamus to the Opposite party no.5 i.e. The District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Pratapgarh, to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in compliance of the Government Order dated 29.12.2008 after issuing him a Certificate for completion of BTC Training Course.
(3.) It is the case of the petitioner as argued by Sri Mohammad Naseerullah, that he had initially appeared in BTC Entrance Examination, 1997, and the District Institute of Education at Atarsand of District Pratapgarh had orally permitted the petitioner to appear in the said examination. However, even after declaration of his result as successful candidate he was not given admission at Atarsand and therefore, he filed a Writ Petition No.489 (M/S) of 2000 (Yamuna Prasad Yadav Vs. The State of U.P. and Others) wherein an interim order was granted by this Court on 23.02.2000 directing the respondents to give admission to the petitioner in BTC Training Course. The aforesaid writ petition was allowed on 01.04.2003 and even though the writ petition was allowed the petitioner having completed two years BTC Training Course in pursuance of the interim order dated 23.02.2000 he was not issued BTC Training Certificate. The State of Uttar Pradesh filed a Special Appeal No.332 of 2003 against the order dated 01.04.2003 which Special Appeal was allowed by the Division Bench by observing that the petitioner had been wrongly communicated that he was selected in BTC Training Course. As undisputedly, his marks were only 147.88 whereas cut off marks of male candidates was 155.93 marks. It was observed by the Division Bench that mere allowing the respondents (the petitioner herein) to secure admission and the interim order passed by this Court would not give any vested right to the respondents to undertake the Training or to get his result declared. The Division Bench observed thus:- "......."In view of the admitted fact that the respondent was a male candidate, he could not have been selected in the category of Women candidate. But his name was wrongly included in the aforesaid select list. He was allowed to pursue the Training Course under the interim orders of this Court, but the respondents being ineligible and having failed in the admission test could not be given advantage of the interim order in this manner. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside which is hereby set aside.....";