GULAB CHANDRA VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE special appeal has arisen from a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge dated 19 March 2015 dismissing the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The appellant, who is the original petitioner is in appeal.

(2.) IN the writ petition, the appellant sought to challenge the appointment of the fifth respondent on 6 February 2015, as an Assistant Teacher in the primary section on a contractual basis. The advertisement, which was issued on 16 September 2014 provided that a candidate must possess the eligibility qualifications prescribed by the Rules of 2009. A candidate was required to possess either a BTC or CT qualification, but it was prescribed that if no candidate with a BTC qualification was available, in such a situation, a B. Ed. candidate could be selected.

(3.) THE ground in the writ petition (ground 'C' of Paragraph 16) was to the effect that under the terms of the advertisement, there were three vacancies of which two were for general category candidates and one was reserved for a scheduled caste candidate. The appellant specifically pleaded that the advertisement stipulated that it was only in the absence of a BTC category candidate that a candidate with a B. Ed. Degree would be eligible. The appellant also relied on the U.P. Social Welfare (Department of Teachers) Service Rules, 2009.