RAVINDRA NATH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.Manish Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) THE petitioners have challenged the order dated 31st of December, 2011, passed by the District Magistrate, Sultanpur, whereby they have been declared ineligible for selection on the post of Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis/Junior Assistant.

(3.) BRIEFLY the facts of the case as set out are that the petitioners instituted a writ petition before this court being writ petition No.8063 (SS) of 2011 for their regular appointment on the post of Assistant Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis/Junior Assistant as they have been working in the capacity of Seasonal Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis. This court disposed of the writ petition on 8.11.2011 with the direction to the District Magistrate, Sultanpur to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation in accordance with law. This court also permitted the petitioners to place the judgment dated 26.8.2011, passed in writ petition A No.68698 of 2006:Jiv Kumar Tiwari versus State of U.P. and others before the concerned authority. The District Magistrate has considered their case by means of order impugned and found that either they have crossed the age or they do not possess the eligibility prescribed therefor. The petitioner Nos.1,2 and 4 were working as Seasonal Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis at Collectorate, Sultanpur from 1988 to 1995 and petitioner No.3 worked as such from 1986 to 1995. It is stated that this court in the case of Virendra Singh versus State of U.P., reported 1995 (1) UPLBEC 625 issued direction to the State Government to fill 50% posts of Seasonal Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis, pursuant to which number of Seasonal Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis have been regularized, but the petitioners' case was not considered. It is stated that similarly situated persons also filed writ petition No.794 (SS) of 2004. They had also become overage, but this court issued direction the District Magistrate, Sultanpur to consider their cases for regular appointment on the post of Assistant Wasil Baqi Nawis. This court also provided that even if the petitioners have crossed 45 years of age, their cases shall be considered in the light of the facts and status as existed on 8.12.2005 i.e. the date of judgment. This court also provided that the opposite parties may seek exemption from the Board of Revenue in the light of the Government Order dated 10.12.2002. While implementing the order passed by this court two petitioners of writ petition No.794 (SS) of 2004 as well as seven more persons were appointed and some of them are junior to the petitioner No.3.