LAWS(ALL)-2010-7-79

RAJESH KUMAR Vs. REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT

Decided On July 27, 2010
RAJESH KUMAR Appellant
V/S
REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions relate to a dispute concerning Class-IV appointments in the District judgeship of Ghazipur. The matters were nominated to this Bench vide order dated 8.6.2005. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties, therefore the matter is being proceeded with to be disposed of finally with the consent of the learned counsel appearing in both the cases. I have heard Sri V.D.Chauhan for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 44390 of 2005 and Sri Vikas Budhwar for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 44146 of 2008. Sri Rajeev Gupta has been heard for the respondent High Court and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) THE three petitioners in Writ Petition No. 44390 of 2005 Rajesh Kumar, Brijesh Kumar Srivastava and Chandrama Ram are the respondent Nos. 12,13 and 14 in the Writ Petition No. 44146 of 2008. In view of the nature of the order that is proposed to be passed it is not necessary to further await any notices on respondent Nos. 4 to 11,15 and 16 in Writ Petition No. 44146 of 2008.

(3.) A counter-affidavit was filed in the said writ petition and in para 23 thereof the then District Judge, Ghazipur has averred that the petitioners were not entitled to any show cause or opportunity of hearing prior to their termination as they were appointed purely on ad hoc basis and no procedure had been followed for their appointments as prescribed in Rule 4(2) of the UP. Subordinate Civil Courtlnferior Establishment, Rules 1955. In para 24 of the same counter-affidavit, it was pointed out that Anurag Srivastava was not junior to the petitioners and that it was in order to meet out the urgency of the functioning of the Fast Track Court that Anurag Srivastava was considered for accommodation as a peon, as there was no sufficient time to make regular appointments on the post of peons in the Fast Track Court. The District Judge further indicated that he was ready to consider the candidature of the petitioners in future against available vacancies.