SUDHIR AGARWAL,J. - (1.) Heard Sri S.C. Dwivedi, Advocate, for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.
(2.) By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 29.08.2005 (Annexure-12 to writ petition) wherein selection and appointment of petitioner on a Class-IV post has not been recognized and his representation for payment of salary has been rejected on the ground that selection was not made in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Group ''D' Employees Service (U.P.) Rules, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1985").
(3.) The record shows that there were 23 sanctioned Class-IV posts in Mangla Prasad Inter College, Bampur, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as "College') wherein 4 posts were vacant for which District Inspector of Schools (hereinafter referred to as "DIOS") vide order dated 23.11.2002 granted permission to fill in the same. The selection and appointment made by Principal, appointing authority, was initially rejected by order dated 24.06.2002 on the ground that advertisement was not made in daily newspaper having wide circulation and therefore fresh advertisement be made. Principal again made selection and forwarded documents but DIOS did not take any action and, therefore, Writ Petition No. 35854 of 2004 was filed by petitioner and another Gulab Chandra which was disposed of vide order dated 03.09.2004 directing DIOS to pass appropriate order expeditiously and preferably within the period of two months. The judgment reads as under: "The contention of the petitioner is that in response to an advertisement issued by Principal, Mangla Prasad Inter College, Bampur, Allahabad petitioners had applied for appointment as Peon and Safai Karmchari respectively. It has been contended that after following the procedure prescribed and after having faced the interview before selection committee the petitioners had been selected and they also joined on their respective posts on 21.12.2002 and 24.12.2002. The papers regarding grant of financial approval to the appointments of the petitioners had been forwarded by the Respondent no. 6 on 16.12.2002 and a reminder had also been sent on 9.6.2003 but despite all efforts the respondent-authorities have not passed any other with regard to the grant of financial approval to the appointments of the petitioners. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in case if, with regard to their grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioners file a comprehensive representation before District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad, Respondent No. 3 along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent along with the papers sent by the Principal of the college for grant of financial approval to the appointments of the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the same. With the aforesaid observation/direction this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost." ;