PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI,J. - (1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers: "(i) The communication dated 11.02.2015 may kindly be declared illegal and respondents may also be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Safai Karamchari on and from the date other selected candidates were given appointment with all consequential benefits. (ii) The respondents be directed to grant arrears of salary with interest @ 18% per annum. (iii) Any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deemed just and proper be passed in favour of the petitioner. (iv) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner."
(2.) Brief facts as noticed by this Court are that the respondents issued an advertisement dated 25.05.2012 for the post of Safai Karamchari. The draw were opened and the petitioner was selected and asked to produce his original certificates vide communication dated 11.02.2015. The appointment order was thereafter issued on 01.10.2014 but the appointment was activated on account of the petitioner's brother Avinash Kumar having been given appointment under the same advertisement.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown from the advertisement as well as the appointment order that no such condition was prescribed by the respondents at the time of advertisement which could debar the petitioner only on account of his brother having being appointed.;