RAVINDRA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHARATI Sapru, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) THE petitioners numbering 1 to 6 were candidates who applied for Class-IV posts in the institution known as Seth Anandram Jaipuriya Inter College, Anand Nagar, Maharajganj. THE petitioners had applied against posts, which were advertised on 28-5-2002. It is the contention of the petitioners that they appeared in the process of selection, faced an interview and were declared successful and were issued letters of appointment on 12- 6-2002 by the Principal of the institution.

(3.) LEARNED Standing Counsel has argued in reply that Regulation 101, Chapter III of the U. P. Intermediate Act, 1921 contemplates prior approval to the appointment, which is to be made. The purpose is for the grant of financial sanction. It stands to reason that prior approval to appointment can only be sought before the issuance of the letter of appointment, which can only be issued after completing the process of selection. LEARNED Counsel for the State has argued that Regulation 101 does not contemplate the granting of prior approval to initiate the process of selection.