ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) This petition is directed against an order passed by the Director General Prantiya Rakshak Dal dated 31.1.2019, which records that in view of the advertisement published on 13.3.2018, the post of Regional Youth Welfare Officer and Vyayam Adhikari would be filled by Subordinate Service Commission. Petitioners' claim for exemption in the outer age limit prescribed in the advertisement has also been rejected. This decision appears to have been taken relying upon the earlier Government Order dated 24.6.2003, which is also assailed in this petition.
(2.) It appears that the post in question was advertised by the department itself in the year 2001 and the petitioners also applied pursuant to it. However, the proceedings of recruitment were not finalised on account of various reasons. One Arun Kumar Singh appears to have filed a writ petition before this Court i.e. Writ Petition No. 5030 (S/S) of 2003 which was disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to take steps for holding written examination according to the advertisement dated 7.9.2001 in accordance with the then applicable Rules of 2001. The State Government thereafter issued a notification on 10.9.2007, bringing the post itself within the purview of Public Service Commission. The recruitment was subsequently assigned to the U.P. Subordinate Commission after a Commission for subordinate services came to be constituted vide U.P. Act No. 20 of 2014. The Commission thereafter proceeded to advertise the post vide Advertisement No. 1 of 2018. The advertisement of the Commission was challenged by the present petitioner by filing Writ Petition No. 11988 of 2018 which was dismissed vide following orders passed on 17.5.2018:- "By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the advertisement published by respondent no.4, namely, the Secretary, U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission, Lucknow dated 13.3.2018 on the ground that the respondent no.3 has not declared the result of examination conducted by the department for 423 posts of Kshetriya Yuya Kalyan Evam Pradeshik Vikash Dal Adhikari, pursuant to the selection made vide advertisement dated 7.9.2001. The prayer made in the writ petition is for issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear in the physical examination to be held by the U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission by granting relaxation in age to the petitioner. Lastly it is submitted that at least they may decide the representation dated 4.4.2018 moved by the petitioner within a stipulated period. It is contended by the petitioner that he has applied for the aforesaid post advertised vide advertisement dated 7.9.2001 and after completing all the formalities, he had appeared in the examination conducted by the department. While the petitioner was waiting for the result, an advertisement for 423 posts of Kshetriya Yuya Kalyan Evam Pradeshik Vikash Dal Adhikari was published on 9.8.2003 without finalizing the previous selection process. The said advertisement dated 9.8.2003 was put to challenge in Writ Petition No. 5030 (S/S) 2003 by one Arun Kumar Singh, who also claim to be an applicant in the advertisement dated 7.9.2001. This Court vide judgment and order dated 9.8.2005 has disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the right of the petitioner therein was to be considered pursuant to the initial advertisement dated 7.9.2001 inasmuch as, the advertisement dated 9.8.2003 categorically provides that the applicants who had applied pursuant to the earlier advertisement may apply afresh. It was, therefore, held that the advertisement dated 9.8.2003 shall be treated as corrigendum to the earlier advertisement of the year 2001. The process of selection for fresh applicants would be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the advertisement dated 9.8.2003. However, the applicants who appeared in the written examination pursuant the advertisement dated 7.9.2001, the selection process for them shall be made in observance of the procedure prescribed under the unamended U.P. Procedure for Direct Recruitment for Group 'C' Posts (Outside the Purview of the U.P. Public Service Commission) Rules, 2001. Further direction was issued to complete the selection process; declare the result and issue the letters of appointment to the successful candidates within a period of two months. It is submitted in paragraphs '9', '10', '11', '12' and '13' of the writ petition that the result of the selection pursuant to the advertisement dated 7.8.2001 and 9.8.2003, in view of the directions of this Court dated 9.8.2005, has never been declared. Rather an enquiry was initiated into the irregularities in the selection process and the CBCID was assigned the task to complete the enquiry. A report dated 26.12.2007 was submitted by CBCID to the Special Secretary Home in the year 2007. It is contended that the report of the CBCID dated 26.12.2007 and 8.12.2007 indicates that no irregularities were found in the selection process pursuant to the advertisement dated 9.8.2003. It was, therefore, not open for the State Government to scrap the selection process and issue direction to the commission for making fresh selection against the number of posts in the advertisement dated 13.3.2018 by including 423 posts advertised in the year 2001 and 2003. On a pointed query made by the Court as to what has been transpired for a period of 10 years i.e. after submission of the report by CBCID (in the year 2007) no concrete reply could be given by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Reference has been made to the applications under RTI Act moved on 25.6.2014 to submit that no report whatsoever was received by the petitioner and as such it is not possible for the Court to draw any conclusion that the selection process has been scrapped by the State Government without there being any adverse report regarding the irregularities. Moreover, after a period of more than 10 years, it is not possible for the Court to take an exception to the advertisement issued by the Commission for selection to the post in question. It is admitted to the learned counsel for the petitioner that the post in question has been brought within the purview of the U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission, Lucknow by the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission Act, 2014 which was promulgated on 4.12.2014. This Court is, therefore, of the considered view that the Subordinate Services Selection Commission, Lucknow is fully competent to advertise the vacancy as has been determined by the State Government. No infirmity is found in the advertisement dated 13.3.2018 issued by respondent no.4 on the assertion made in the present petition. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed."
(3.) A special appeal (Def.) No. 384 of 2018 was preferred against the aforesaid judgment which was also dismissed vide following observations made on 4.9.2018:- "In view of the above, while we do not find any infirmity in the advertisement dated 13.3.2018 and to this extent judgment of learned Single Judge assailed in this appeal is hereby confirmed but with regard to non declaration of result of earlier selection, we find it expedient to direct respondents to take a final decision in the matter within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Counsel for appellants further contended that in case selection pursuant to advertisement dated 13.3.2018 is valid and allowed to continue, appellants having already become over age should be allowed relaxation in the matter of age. However, learned counsel for appellants could not show any provision under which such relaxation can be given to appellants and in absence of any such provision direction for relaxation in the matter of age, dehors the rules, cannot be given. In the above facts and circumstances, while affirming judgment of learned Single Judge, in so far as it has upheld advertisement dated 13.3.2018 and declined to grant any relief in the matter of relaxation in age, we dispose of this appeal by directing respondents to take a final decision in respect to selection initiated vide advertisement dated 7.9.2001 within six months of production of a certified copy of this order and proceed in respect thereof accordingly.";