MITHLESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. Aggrieved by the orders dated 29. 12. 2005 (Annexures 13-A and 13-C to the writ petition), whereby the respondents No. 10 and 11 have been appointed as Collection Amin on regular basis the petitioners have filed the present writ petition assailing the said orders and have sought a writ of certiorari for quashing the same. The petitioners have also sought a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining respondents from taking any action in favour of respondents No. 10 and 11 on the basis of the orders dated 29. 12. 2005 and further to grant regular appointment to the petitioners as Collec tion Amin and to pay them regular monthly salary as payable to the regularly appointed Collection Amins.

(2.) THE facts in brief, giving rise to the present writ petition, are, that both the petitioners, Mithlesh Kumar and Muztuba Hussain were engaged as Seasonal Collection Amin on 1. 7. 1991 and have been continuously engaged from time to time as Seasonal Collection Amin since thereafter. From 5. 3. 2002 till 30. 7. 2005 the petitioners were not engaged as Seasonal Collection Amin and were not assigned any duty at all. But thereafter they were engaged on 10. 8. 2005 till 30. 9. 2005 in the aforesaid capacity. A seniority list of Seasonal Collection Amins of District Chitrakoot was prepared by the Collector on 30. 5. 2003 wherein the respondents No. 10 and 11 were shown at Serial No. 16 and 23 while the petition ers were placed at Serial No. 10 and 18 respectively. it is also, alleged that the petitioners as well as the respondents No. 10 and 11 belong to backward class and, therefore, are entitled to claim all benefits admissible to Other Backward Classes.

(3.) ON behalf of respondents No. 3 to 9 a counter-affidavit has been filed sworn by Sri Devi Dass, Deputy Collector Chitrakoot wherein the date of appointment of the petitioners and the fact that the petitioners and respondents No. 10 and 11 belong to Other Backward Class are not disputed. However, it is said that no selection process could be held in August, 2005 due to ban order dated 3. 8. 2005 issued by the State Government. Subsequently when the matter was clarified that there is no ban in respect to regular selection on the post of Collection Amin, the Selection Committee held its meeting on 29. 10. 2005. A list of all Seasonal Collection Amins prepared at Tahsil level as on 24. 10. 2005 was considered by the aforesaid Committee and thereafter it recommended names of respondents No. 10 and 11 besides Sri Shamsher Bahadur, Sri Krishna Pal Singh. Sri Vidya Sagar and Sri Bhooray Lal. Sri Bhooray Lal is a scheduled caste and therefore out of six persons who have been selected by the Selection Committee three are from general category, two from other backward class category and one is sched uled caste. It is said that the Selection Committee held that the petitioners do not fulfil requirement of satisfactory service for appointment as regular Collection Amin since their average recovery is less than 70% and therefore, they are not fit for appointment as regular Collection Amin. However, it-is not disputed that up to 15. 12. 2004 there were 17 vacancies of Collection Amin which were available for substantive appointment for which recruitment was made in accordance with rules of U. P. Collection Amin Sewa Niyamawali, 1992.