RADHEY SHYAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) This petition has been filed against the order of reversion. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Satish Chaturvedi is that the respondent no. 3 has been directly recruited in violation of Rule 21 of the U.P. Town Area and Notified Area Committees (Centralised) Service Rules, 1976 which is as under: -

(3.) It appears that during the pendency of the writ petition respondent no. 3 Sri Rajindra Nath Shukla expired. His son who had filed impleadment application for being impleaded as respondent no. 4 has already withdrawn the application for impleadment. At the time of admission the following interim order was granted by this Court: -