SHIV PRABHU YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner applied in response to the advertisement made in the year 1998 -99 for the post of Village Development Officer. The respondents have prepared three select list for different categories. One for General Category, second for OBC and third for Scheduled Caste and few candidates in the waiting list also. The petitioner's name finds place in the waiting list.

(2.) IT so happened that two of the persons amongst the OBC category, who joined the post, have resigned and thus, according to the petitioner, there arose two vacancies, which, according to the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, ought to have been given to the petitioner, who is in the waiting list of OBC category waiting for his turn to be given appointment in case any vacancy remain unfilled during the life of the waiting list. These are the admitted facts which are not disputed. It is also not disputed that the resignation of these two persons belonging to OBC category has taken place during the period of one year which is the life of the waiting list.

(3.) A counter -affidavit has been filed by the respondents in reply to the writ petition. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the counter -affidavit, particularly, in paragraph 6 of the counter -affidavit, the stand taken by the respondents is that since the post on which the petitioner is claiming right to be appointed by virtue of his name being there in the waiting list has already been filled in who admittedly resigned after joining the service. The appointment to this post, if at all is to be made, can be done only after following the procedure prescribed under Rule 17 of the Uttar Pradesh Gram Vikar (Gram Sewak) Sewa Niyamawali, 1980. Rule 17 is reproduced below: .........[vernacular ommited text]...........