BALJEET PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Sampurnanand, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Badrul Hasan, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on be half of the State.

(2.) THROUGH the instant writ petition, the petitioners are assailing the se lection list dated 21.2.2009/22.2.2009 contained in Annexure 1 to the writ peti tion. Further, it has been prayed that the opposite parties shall make fresh se lection following all the norms of selection rules in fair and transparent manner.

(3.) REFUTING the allegations of the petitioners' Counsel, it has been submit ted by Sri Badrul Hasan, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State that the petitioners appeared in the selection process without any demur and when they were declared unsuccessful, they have made all sort of allega tions just to give colour. The appointments were made strictly in accordance with the provisions with rules and there is no irregularity. The persons, who were found eligible by the Selection Committee were given appointment.