PANKAJ KUMAR PRIYAM Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sanjay Maurya, learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as Sri Shailendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel who appears for respondents No. 1 and 2.

(2.) The case of the writ petitioner is that the State Government in order to achieve its noble objects to cope away with the scarcity of the regular teachers came up with a policy decision dtd. 24/7/2021 making short term appointments for a period of one year commensurate to the academic session in that regard. First in the league was the Government Order dtd. 24/7/2021. The said Government Order infused fresh light for the academic sessions to come in future and in this regard, the said Government Order was further followed in a subsequent Government Order dtd. 17/5/2023. As per the writ petitioner, another Government Order was issued on 25/5/2023 with regard to the modalities for appointment of teachers in Sanskrit Vidyalaya. In line with the said Government Order a notification was issued by the respondents dtd. 7/6/2023 for the purposes of making recruitment of Sanskrit Teachers for 14 posts including the Sukhnandan Sanskrit Pathshala, Mohammadpur, Mau. The writ petitioner as per own saying applied in pursuance of the said notification on 19/6/2023 and submitted his document before the institution so specified therein and thereafter triggered an Email to the District Inspector of Schools on 19/6/2023.

(3.) Since the candidature of the writ petitioner was not being considered for the post of Sanskrit Teacher so the writ petitioner preferred the present writ petition seeking relief to the extent that a mandamus be issued directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's application for the post of Sanskrit Teacher which was claimed to be submitted on 19/6/2023.