Arvind Kumar vs State of U.P.and Others

Heard Sri Umesh Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri Avadesh Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

Subject matter of challenge in the present appeal is the order dated 6.11.2007 passed by the Hon''ble Single Judge in Writ Petition No.3086 (S/S) of 2006 which was preferred challenging the order dated 17.2.2006 passed by the Dsitrict Basic Siksha Adhikari, Unnao rejecting the petitioner''s representation on the ground that he has not completed his B.Ed., education as a regular student, hence he is not entitled to be appointed on the post of Siksha Mitra.

Learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court towards a decision taken by this Court in Special Appeal No.1271 of 2007 Gyanendra Kumar Sharma and 49 Ors. v. State of U.P. & others in which this Court has recognized the Distant Education and has held that the candidates who have obtained the degree of B.Ed., by Distant Education are entitled for appointment on the post of Siksha Mitra like the candidates who have obtained the degree as regular students.

The order of the Hon''ble Single Judge shows that instead of deciding the writ petition on merit, the Hon''ble Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition merely on the ground that the period of appointment of Siksha Mitra is only for one academic session and after completing the same a fresh course has to be adopted by educational authorities to make an appointment. However, under the Government order which gives the strength on such appointment, there is a clause of renewal also and if the person seeking renewal is not entitled further for renewal, then only it is open for the authorities to proceed for fresh selection. Thus the writ petition deserves to be heard on merit.

In view of the aforesaid provisions of the Government Order, the order passed by Hon''ble Single Judge is not sustainable and deserves to be set aside.

The appeal is allowed. The order of the Hon''ble Single Judge is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Hon''ble Single Judge to decide the writ petition afresh after taking into consideration the aforesaid judgment of this Court passed in the Special Appeal No.1271 of 2007.

(Appeal allowed)