VINAY DIXIT Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AURAIYA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the file.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by the respondents that the special appeal is not maintainable in the eyes of law as the appellant was neither party in the writ petition nor has filed any leave application before this Court. Moreover, the matter relates to the absorption of the respondent no.4 in the year 2000. The present appellant moved an application having crossed the minimum age for appointment in Government service.

(3.) It is also argued by the learned counsel for the respondents that the present appellant had never claimed that he was ever appointed in the service of the District Magistrate, Auraiya. She is relying on the letter of the District Authority that she has been selected but the appointment letter was never issued nor any selection letter has been annexed. She has preferred this appeal only on the alleged information that she was selected by the District Authority in the year 2001. Hence the present special appeal is not maintainable for the simple reason that only selection does not give any right to the selected candidate unless an appointment letter is issued after selection. In the circumstance, there being no document, showing that the appellant had ever been selected. He has no right in the eyes of the law to relief claimed in present special appeal before the Court.