Krishna Gopal and Another vs State of U.P. and Others

Dilip Gupta, J.—The Petitioners who were working as Seasonal Collection Peons were appointed as Collection Peons on 23rd March, 2010 under Rule 5 of the U.P. Collection Peons'' Service Rules, 2004 on the basis of the recommendation made by the Committee in its meeting held on 10th March, 2010.

It transpires that the case of Jai Narain who was also also working as a Seasonal Collection Peon was also considered in the said meeting held on 10th March, 2010 but his name was not recommended for appointment as a Collection Peon. This order was assailed by Jai Narain in Writ Petition No. 22887 of 2010 which was disposed of by the judgment and order dated 27th April, 2010 with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to examine the claim in accordance with the Rules. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate by the order dated 24th July, 2010 rejected his claim. This order was assailed by Jain Narain in Writ Petition No. 50023 of 2010 which was allowed by the judgment and order dated 16th November, 2010. The order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was set aside and the District Magistrate was directed to examine his case.

The appointment of the Petitioners as as Collection Peons has been cancelled by the order dated 27th January, 2011 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Etawah for the reason that the Court had passed an order on 16th November, 2010 in the Writ Petition filed by Jai Narain.

It is the contention of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners that in the aforesaid writ petition, the appointment of the Petitioners was not under challenge and in any case all that was observed by the Court was that the District Magistrate should examine the case of Jai Narain afresh in accordance with the observations made in the judgment. It is also his submission that merely because the Committee met on 10th March, 2010 to consider the case of the Petitioners as well as of Jai Narain will not mean that the recommendations made by the Committee in favour of the Petitioners would stand cancelled.

The matter requires examination.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents prays for and is granted six weeks'' time to file the counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List this petition for admission/hearing in the week commencing 11th April, 2011.

In view of the submissions advanced by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, it is ordered that the operation of the impugned order dated 27th January, 2011 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Etawah shall remain stayed until further orders.