MARKANDEY MAURYA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and the Standing Counsel.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 15. 4. 2005 (Annexure 8 to the writ petition) by which the promotion granted to him on the post of head munshi has been cancelled, order dated 15. 4. 2005 (Annexure 9 to the writ petition)by which the respondent No. 5 has been promoted in his place as. head munshi and the order dated 20. 11. 1998 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition)-promoting the petitioner on the post of munshi. The challenge to the third order has been made after the application of the petitioner for amending the writ petition was allowed by the Court vide order dated 28. 8. 2006.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent No. 5 has tried to raise a preliminary objection that the petitioner cannot be permitted in this writ petition which has been filed in the year 2005 to challenge the order dated 20. 11. 1998. The aforesaid objection in substance seeks to question the order of the Court allowing the amendment application permitting the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid order. However, the petitioner has not applied for the recall of the order dated 20. 11. 1998 allowing the amendment and the correctness of the said order cannot be gone into by me as I am not sitting in appeal over the said order. Accordingly, the objection as raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is rejected.