KUSUM TARA RAI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Lakshmikant Trigunat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Saral Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of her suspension from service dated 2.7.2014 in contemplation of disciplinary proceeding.

(3.) THE allegation of the petitioner at this stage as mentioned in the suspension order is that in spite of there being a vacancy available under the O.B.C. Category and a candidate having applied for the same, she did not recommend any name for the O.B.C. Category, instead, she recommended both the candidates for General Category; the first as selected candidate and the second as second preference candidate. The second preference candidate belonged to OBC Category should have been recommended for the other post under the said category. There being only two posts, Manju Devi was denied appointment and the reserved category post was carried over to the next year in which she did not apply and another candidate was appointed, with the result that the Manju Devi was arbitrarily denied selection/appointment, merely because of the fault of the petitioner.