SHYAM DUTT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TARUN Agarwala, J. Heard Shri V. K. Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, Sri Rakesh Pandey, the learned counsel for the Committee of Management and Sri V. K. Goel and Sri D. S. M. Tripathi, the learned counsels for the respondent No. 6 and Sri Rajendra Pratap, the learned counsel for the petitioner in the connected writ petition.

(2.) BEFORE coming to the impugned order, it would be necessary to give a brief background which led to filing of the writ petition.

(3.) IT transpires that Sri Surendra Narain Pandey filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court of India which was also dismissed eventually by an order dated 11. 7. 1989. During the pendency of the special leave petition, the respondents intimated the Supreme Court that the petitioner had been appointed as a Lecturer and, based on this statement, the petitioner was impleaded. IT has come on record that the petitioner filed a counter-affidavit in the special leave petition before the Supreme Court of India.