CHANDRA BHWAN PUSHPAKAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) The petitioner has sought a mandamus commanding respondents to appoint him on the post of Seenchpal from the date persons junior to him, i.e. lower in merit, were appointed and given regular posting.

(3.) It is stated that certain posts of Seenchpal were advertised pursuant whereto petitioner applied and selected. He was given training but after completion of training he was not given appointment though persons lower in merit to petitioner were given appointment. The petitioner raised dispute and submitted representation. Vide Annexure 8 to the writ petition, which is a letter dated 22.3.1999 sent by Superintending Engineer, 16th Circle, Irrigation Work, Pratapgarh, to the Chief Engineer, it was informed that admittedly petitioner was first in merit and persons at serial No. 4 and 5 in merit were given regular appointment as "Seenchpal" by Executive Engineer Raibareilly, Sharda Nahar ignoring petitioner's higher merit, hence petitioner's claim for appointment is justified and he should be so appointed. However nothing proceeded further hence the petitioner preferred this writ petition.