SALIJA RAI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition directed against orders of Director of Education and Regional INspectress of Girls Schools the short and the only question that arises for consideration is if the opposite parties committed any error of law in taking the view that amongst candidates with equal quality point mark the one elder in age was entitled to be appointed.

(2.) PRIOR to IVth Removal of Difficulties Order issued under section 33 of U. P. Act no. 5 of 1982 in April 1982 there was no guideline in first three orders issued by the Government as to on what principle appointment should be made from amongst candidates obtaining equal quality point mark. It was in this order that it was provided that where two or more candidates obtain equal quality point mark the candidates obtaining higher percentage of marks in all the examination essential for particular grade shall be placed higher. But under clause (h) of regulation 10 of Chapter II framed under U. P. Intermediate Education Act ii was provided that :

(3.) THE learned counsel then submitted that the order of Director passed in appeal in pursuance of order passed by this court on 16th February, 1984 is manifestly erroneous as apart from noticing arguments no decision has been given. Even this argument has no substance as even assuming that the Director has not based his decision on regulation 10 and his reasoning that since petitioner on the basis of percentage was at no. 2 therefore, she could not claim that appointment of opposite party who was at serial no. 3 may not be very sound but in view of the legal position discussed above the order is not liable to be set aside.