RANJANA TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has assailed the order dated 14.05.2007 issued by the opposite party No.4 terminating the petitioners services on the ground that the State Government is permitted to fill up the post from amongst the reserved category candidate one from OBC category another from schedule caste category. The petitioner has also challenged the instructions dated 21st of February 2007 issued by the State Government by giving permission for appointment on the aforesaid two post from that reserved category candidates.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that total five posts of Assistant Teachers have been sanctioned in the College in question against which two belonging to the General category had been working and one belonging to the schedule caste had been working, however, against two vacant posts the petitioner as well as one another candidate belonging to the OBC category had been appointed. The candidate of OBC is still working and is getting salary, but it is petitioner who had been ousted and the said post has been filled up by an appointment of the candidate belonging to the schedule caste category.?

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , if the instructions issued by the State Government to fill up the post one from amongst the schedule caste category candidate to be implemented, whereas one schedule caste category candidate is already working the same shall be in violation of reservation rule.