SMITRI KUMARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ petitions relate to the same subject matter of the claim of the Petitioner and the contesting Respondents on the post of Shiksha Mitra stated to be reserved for the female category.

(2.) Simitri Kumari, who is Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 21598 of 2008, is the contesting Respondent in the other two writ petitions. Deepa Minj is the Petitioner in the other two writ petitions. The selection relates to the year 2006. The Gram Shiksha Samti drew a resolution under which Deepa Minj is stated to have been proposed for being appointed as Shiksha Mitra on the ground that she was the most eligible candidate in accordance with the merit drawn up in the meeting which was convened for the said purpose and accordingly she was appointed against the said post and continued to function.

(3.) Almost one year thereafter Simitri Kumari moved a complaint/application on the ground that she was higher in merit than Deepa Minj and, therefore, she ought to have been selected. The objection to the same by Deepa Minj is that the application form of Simitri Kumari was not complete in all respects inasmuch as she had not furnished the domicile Certificate that was required to be accompanied alongwith the application to be moved in this regard and no such irregularity had been cured till the last date of submission of the application form.