RANJU SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioners against their discontinuance as Clerks in the Fast Track Courts, established at District Ghazipur in Uttar Pradesh on 5/8/2022. Thus aggrieved, the appellants have preferred these appeals.

(2.) It is not in issue that fast track courts were created in different districts of the State of Uttar Pradesh. According to the appellant-petitioners, there existed no procedure for making appointment of ministerial staff in such fast track courts, and therefore a circular came to be issued by the Registrar General of this Court on 25/7/2001, which permitted the District Judges to make ad-hoc appointments for specified period, as internal arrangement, for such courts. Clause-III of the circular, which is relied upon, reads as under:-

(3.) According to the appellants, it is by invoking the authority indicated in the aforesaid circular that all the appellants were appointed on different dates in the year 2001. The appellants also rely upon a subsequent circular issued by the High Court on 15/4/2005 for rehabilitation of Class-III and Class-IV Ex-employees of the abolished fast track courts in various judgeship of the State. According to the appellants, it was pursuant to these circulars that the appellants came to be continued in the employment. It appears that appellants continued in employment till a report came to be submitted by the concerned Administrative Judge, who noticed that appointments were made without following any procedure, and therefore, there existed no selection in the eyes of law. The recommendation of the Administrative Judge, dtd. 6/11/2006, which is part of the record of the appeal, is extracted hereinafter:-