Court No. - 34 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 841 of 2010 Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Sec. Secondary Edu. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- A.K. Pandey,Shashi Nandan Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,S.K. Pandey Hon'ble Prakash Chandra Verma,J.
Hon’ble Ram Autar Singh,J.
The respondent no. 6-appellant, aggrieved by the orders dated 22.4.2010,
26.4.2010 and 3.5.2010 passed by learned Single Judge in Civil Misc Writ
Petition No. 19410 of 2010, has preferred this appeal under Rule 5 Chapter
VIII of the High Court Rules.
Learned Single Judge has entertained the writ petition and has directed for
enquiry to be held against the appointment of the appellant.
Mr. P. N. Saxena, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent appellant relying upon the division bench judgement of this Court
passed in Special Appeal (D) NO. 1172 of 2009 contained in Annexure N0. 8
to this Special Appeal submitted that in view of the law laid down by the
division bench of this Court in the said judgement the writ petition was not
maintainable and no direction could have been issued as the petitioner of that
writ petition was not a candidate in that very Selection proceedings.
We have perused the judgement of division bench passed by this Court, relied
upon by Mr. P. N. Saxena, learned Senior Advocate, which is binding on us,
in which it has been held that the� writ petition of that petitioner ought not to
have been entertained by the learned Single Judge on this ground alone that he
was not a candidate for appointment.
In the present case also, appellant is not a candidate, therefore the writ petition
ought not to have been entertained. Accordingly, we set aside the orders
passed by the learned single Judge giving liberty to take recourse to any other
proceedings permissible under the law.
In the result the special appeal is allowed and the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.7.2010
Abhishek Sri.
