ASHUTOSH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. Lalta Prasad Mishra, and Sri Jaideep Narain Mathur, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avinash Singh Vishen on behalf of the petitioners, Sri Kuldeep Pati Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P..

(2.) It has been submitted on behalf of petitioners that in pursuance of advertisement dtd. 11/01/2016 issued by the U.P Public Services Commission for appointment to various posts including the post of Naib-Tehsildar the petitioners had applied and appeared in the recruitment exam and were declared selected. In the select list prepared by the Public Service Commission the names of the petitioners find mention at serial No. 33, 35, 108, 115, 152 and 186 respectively. It has been submitted that the appointment letters to the petitioners were issued on the various dates between 03/09/2019 and 04/03/2021. It was submitted that the anomaly was committed by the State as appointment letters were issued randomly to the candidates whose documents stood verified. This resulted in issuance of appointment letters randomly permitting persons much lower in the select list prepared by the U.P Public Service Commission to join much prior to other candidates whose verification was completed subsequently. The petitioners duly joined on the post of Naib Tehsildar with much delay and after completion of the period of probation petitioner No.s 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were confirmed by order dtd. 20/04/2022 which was corrected on 05/09/2023 while petitioner No. 2 was confirmed by order dtd. 19/06/2023.

(3.) The respondents proceeded to prepare a gradation list of all the selected candidates on 18/09/2020 which did not include petitioners as they had joined the service between 03/07/2020 and 07/04/2021. It is submitted that subsequently on representation having been made by the petitioners the names were included.