KM POONAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS intra court appeal, under the Rules of the Court, is preferred against the judgment of the Hon'ble single Judge dated 9.5.2007 allowing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41961 of 2006, Rakesh Bhardwarj v. State of U. P. and others, with certain observations and directions.

(2.) WE have heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Arun Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the appellant ; Shri P. K. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-respondent No. 6 and the learned standing counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 vehemently opposed the appeal and contended that the very requisition sent by the management to the Selection Board to recommend the name of the appellant to the post in question was without jurisdiction since at the relevant time the vacancy not being available the entire selection process undertaken by the Board was illegal and the appointment made pursuant thereto is void. It is further contended that if in a particular year of recruitment promotion quota is not full, steps first have to be taken to fill up the vacancy by giving promotion and only when no eligible candidates are available, steps for appointment by direct recruitment is to be taken. It is submitted that in the case in hand, no objective consideration was made as to why the vacancy in question is not first filled up as per quota by promotion and has wrongly been reserved for Scheduled Caste category ignoring the roaster point. It is, therefore, submitted that in the absence of any factual or legal error in the judgment no interference in the appeal is warranted.