NARESH KUMAR KASHYAP Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE, HARIDWAR (UTTARAKHAND)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: -

(2.) HEARD Sri Mukesh Kumar Giri with Sri Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Arvind Vashisth, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the entire material available on record.

(3.) IN brief, the facts of the case are that in April, 2003, an advertisement was issued in a daily Hindi Newspaper whereby the applications were invited from eligible candidates for ten Class IV posts and two posts of Drivers in District Court, Haridwar in the pay scale of Rs. 2550 -3200 and Rs. 3050 -4590 respectively. In the said advertisement, it was specifically mentioned that the vacancies could be increased or decreased. After completing of selection process, the final result was declared and a list of Selected Candidates was prepared on 14.7.2003 in which 34 candidates (including the petitioners) were selected. It is the admitted case of the parties that out of those 34 candidates, 16 candidates were given appointment and rest of the 18 candidates were kept in waiting list. The names of the petitioners find place in the aforesaid waiting list at Sl. Nos. 19, 25, 28 and 29 respectively. It would also not be out of place to mention that the services of the petitioners were governed by the U.P. Subordinate Civil Courts Inferior Establishment Rules, 1955, as applicable to the State of Uttarakhand. Thereafter, on 16.3.2004, the then District Judge gave temporary appointment to the remaining 18 candidates (including the petitioners). However, on record only the appointment letter of petitioner no. 1 - Naresh Kumar Kashyap has been brought. In the last sentence of para 2 of the said appointment letter, it has been specifically mentioned that : - ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...