SHIV SHANKER SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. K. Seth, J. The petitioner has challenged validity of Section 33-C since been introduced by amendment of the U. P Secondary Education Service Commis sion and Selection Board Act, 1982 by means of enactment of U. P Secondary Education Service Commission and Selec tion Board (Amendment) Act, 1998 being Act No. 25 of 1998. on the ground that the cut-off dale of 25th August, 1993 is ar bitrary and without any rational basis.

(2.) MR.Sudhakar Pandey,learned Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the said amendment on the basis of the petitioner's right to avail of benefits of the said provision of Section 33-C as amended by reason of the petitioner's ad hoc appointment on the post of Principal. Ad mittedly, a person can challenge vires or validity of an Act provided the same affects his legal right. One can also challenge vires of such Act if in its application it affects all similarly situated persons generally. This writ petition has not been presented in a representative capacity nor the petitioner has sought to represent any class or people. On the other hand the petitioner has sought to challenge this amendment solely on his own legal right as an in dividual. Therefore, unless the petitioner is able to show that he has a legal right to challenge, he cannot maintain this writ petition.

(3.) IN the facts and circumstances of the case as observed above, this writ peti tion is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed. .