RAJIV KUMAR SAXENA AND OTHERS Vs. COLLECTOR, FARRUKHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were selected for appointment in the Collectorate, Farrukhabad and their names were included in the select list dated 8. 2. 1986, Annexure I to the writ petition. The petitioners were also given appointment in short term vacancies from time to time on the basis of the said select list. Afterwards it appears that another list has been prepared in 1987 and appointment have also been made from that list.

(2.) The contention of the petitioners is that they may be appointed on regular basis as the first select list is still in operation. In support of their contention, the petitioners have relied upon a Government, order dated 22.2.1989, a copy of which was been filed as Annexures RA I to the Rejoinder Affidavit. It. is stated in this Government order that a select list shall remain operative in respect of a candidate, whose name is entered in that list, if that candidate has been given appointment ever for a short term, on the basis of the directions contained in this Government the contention of the petitioners appears to be well-found. There is nothing in the counter affidavits to suggest that the claim made by the petitioners is wrong and should not be accepted. As a matter of fact the averments made by the petitioners have not been opposed.

(3.) This writ petition succeeds and is allowed and it is directed that the petitioners shall be absorbed and appointed as clerks on regular basis against the posts which had been directed to be kept in reserve for the petitioners under the interim order of this court dated 30.6.1985. If in ignorance of the order passed by this court for keeping three posts reserved for the petitioners, these posts have already been filed up, the petitioners shall be absorbed against the posts vacancies which are or may become available.