Court No. - 30
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2659 of 2011
Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Pandey And Another
Respondent :- Chain Sukh Bhartiya, Chairman, U.P. Secondary Edu. Service
Petitioner Counsel :- Yogesh Kumar Saxena
Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.
This case was called out as fresh before Lunch. The Court asked learned Standing Counsel to intimate Sri A.K.Yadav, learned Standing Counsel for the U.P.Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Allahabad to be present after Lunch. After Lunch when the case is taken up Sri Yadav is present and states that the matter relates to the advertisement No.1/99-2000, and at that time the building where records were kept was not in good condition, hence some records were sufficiently damaged or are not traceable and such cases are not more that 10% taking into account all the previous advertisements before the Supreme Court decision in Balbir Kaur Vs. Service Selection Board and others 2008 (3) U.P.L.B.E.C. 2376. It has further been stated that in all such cases Selection Board will be issuing fresh advertisement within two weeks. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argues that in view of the earlier decision it is not permissible and statement that the records are not traceable is also not correct. In any case learned counsel Sri Yadav is required to file counter affidavit.
List in the week commencing 11.7.2011.
Order Date :- 20.5.2011
VPC
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2659 of 2011
Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Pandey And Another
Respondent :- Chain Sukh Bhartiya, Chairman, U.P. Secondary Edu. Service
Petitioner Counsel :- Yogesh Kumar Saxena
Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.
This case was called out as fresh before Lunch. The Court asked learned Standing Counsel to intimate Sri A.K.Yadav, learned Standing Counsel for the U.P.Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Allahabad to be present after Lunch. After Lunch when the case is taken up Sri Yadav is present and states that the matter relates to the advertisement No.1/99-2000, and at that time the building where records were kept was not in good condition, hence some records were sufficiently damaged or are not traceable and such cases are not more that 10% taking into account all the previous advertisements before the Supreme Court decision in Balbir Kaur Vs. Service Selection Board and others 2008 (3) U.P.L.B.E.C. 2376. It has further been stated that in all such cases Selection Board will be issuing fresh advertisement within two weeks. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argues that in view of the earlier decision it is not permissible and statement that the records are not traceable is also not correct. In any case learned counsel Sri Yadav is required to file counter affidavit.
List in the week commencing 11.7.2011.
Order Date :- 20.5.2011
VPC
No comments:
Post a Comment