SANJAY KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) H. L. Gokhale, C. J. Heard Smt. Anita Tripathi, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Ravi Pratap, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondent No. 7.

(2.) THE facts of this matter show that a good scheme of Shiksha Mitra is derailed because of litigation and the orders passed by the Government officials, This is a case where the appointment was to be made for the academic year 2005-06 in a village in district Basti. THE advertisement itself was however given at the end of the academic year on 8th April, 2006. This selection procedure went on thereafter until 26th November, 2006 and the appellant claims to have joined on 7. 2. 2007. But by a stay order the appellant was again out of job after a couple of days. THE consequence is that thereafter there has been no teacher at all work ing as Shiksha Mitra in the institution. THEre have been orders by the District Magistrate and then by the Courts also.

(3.) IN the circumstances since the concerned academic year has elapsed long back and since nobody is appointed, there cannot be any appointment ei ther of the petitioner or of the respondent No. 7. The prayer of appointment is in the nature of specific relief and the specific relief can be granted only when one makes out a case. No such case is made out by both of them and the appeal, as well as the writ petition both, stand disposed of with this order.