BRIJENDRA SINGH VERMA Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SABHAJEET Yadav, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anoop Misra, holding brief of Sri Rakesh Bahadur for respondent No. 2 and the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of other respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 19-1-1989 passed by the Regional Higher Education Officer, U. P. , Lucknow and order dated 9-6-1989 passed by him. By the aforesaid orders initially the petitioner's appointment was disapproved on the ground that while making the selection and appointment the statute of University has not been observed and no one has been appointed amongst the quota reserved for schedule caste while mentioning 4 names including the names of the petitioner at serial No. 2. It appears that thereafter, materials were placed by the Principal of the Institution showing that the petitioner's appointment was made on Class IV post after asking the name from Employment Exchange while making selection on the post in question, the sufficient observance of advertisement of vacancy has been made by asking the name of candidates from Employment Exchange. In supplementary affidavit a list of candidates asked from Employment Exchange has been filed wherein the name of petitioner has been placed at serial No. 22, therefore, it cannot be said that selection of the petitioner was made in violation of provisions of statute in question. Besides this, it is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the quota of reservation belonging to the scheduled caste has already been fulfilled, therefore, the petitioner's appointment cannot be disapproved on the aforesaid ground also.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid observations and directions the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Petition allowed. .