AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anjani Kumar, J.—Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs :
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the advertisement regarding Corrigendum dated 3.11.2002 published in Daily Newspaper "Amar Ujala" by the respondents (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) with all its consequential effects.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to make appointments by way of advertisement dated 2.9.2002 published in Daily Newspapers "Amar Ujala".
(iii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, as this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances existing in the present case.
(iv) Award the costs of this writ petition in favour of the petitioners."
A perusal of the advertisement dated 3rd November, 2002, Annexure-''3'' to the writ petition, clearly demonstrates that it has wrongly been referred to as Corrigendum in the writ petition. It only says that by this advertisement in order to fill up six vacancies of Sweeper/ Chaukidar for "Other Backward Classes" category, applications are invited. Instead of giving details, it only says that the proforma and the service condition would be the same as is published in the earlier newspaper with regard to another set of vacancies for Scheduled Castes. The petitioners, who appear to have applied pursuant to the earlier advertisement dated 2nd September, 2002 published in the newspaper. Feeling aggrieved by this action of the respondents whereof pursuant to the advertisement dated 3rd November, 2002. Annexure-''3'' to the writ petition according to the petitioners, they have not been invited for interview, therefore they have rushed before this Court. The argument advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners is fallacious. The petitioners having belonged to the category of Scheduled Castes are not entitled to apply pursuant to the advertisement dated 3rd November, 2002 and if the respondents have not forwarded/ considered their applications, they have not committed any illegality or irregularities so as to warrant any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Petitioners have miserably failed to demonstrate that they have any legal right to be called for interview or the action of the respondents also cannot be demonstrated to be either perverse, or bad in law, nor any statutory provision has been shown by the petitioners with regard to the aforesaid fact.
In view of what has been stated above, this writ petition devoid of any merits is accordingly dismissed. However, the parties shall bear their own costs.