MAHIP NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner who prays for quashing of the order dated 18.12.2012 and 20.2.2013 whereby his continuance as an Assistant Block Resource Co-ordinator has been annulled on the ground that the petitioner's appointment was not in accordance with rules. The contention of Sri Tripathi, is that this order has been passed at the behest of the direction issued by the District Magistrate who is no authority in the matter, and therefore, the order having been passed on the dictate of the superior authority who is not the statutory authority amounts to surrender of jurisdiction. He therefore contends that the impugned order deserves to be quashed.

(2.) It is further stated in Para 36 as an alternative argument that the petitioner's engagement was in a stop gap arrangement as A.B.R.C. (English) till a regular selection is made in terms of the Government Order applicable. It has been stated that no regular selection has been held so far. He contends that even otherwise the petitioner should be made to continue till such arrangement is made and therefore the impugned order is erroneous.

(3.) Having heard Sri Tewari, the engagement of a Block Resource Coordinator or an Assistant is governed by the provisions of the relevant Government Orders one of them being dated 2nd February, 2011 copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.