IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD
I N D E X
IN
CIVIL
MISC. WRIT PETITION NO.
OF 2011
(Under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India)
(DISTRICT – BANDA)
Allahabad Adhivakta Sangthan, Allahabad and
another
-------------------------------------Petitioners
Versus
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
through its Registrar General
and others -------------------------------------Respondents
|
Sl.no.
|
Particulars.
|
Dates.
|
Ann.
|
Pages.
|
|
1
|
List of dates and Events.
|
--
|
-
|
|
|
2
|
Stay Application (Under Chapter XXII Rule
1 of High Court Rules, 1952)
|
--
|
-
|
|
|
3
|
Writ Petition (Under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India)
|
--
|
-
|
|
|
4
|
Copy of advertisement published in the
newspaper.
|
27.2.2010
|
1
|
|
|
5
|
Photostat copy of the exemplar
advertisement of District Judgeship Bareilly having Form-A Appendix-I.
|
13/16.3.2011
|
2
|
|
|
6
|
Copy of the question paper having the
questions set up of two marks each compulsorily attended.
|
27.2.2011
|
3
|
|
|
7
|
Photostat copy of
the minutes of selection committee.
|
16.3.2011
29.3.2011
|
4
|
|
|
8
|
Copy of the list
of selected candidates.
|
30.3.2011
|
5
|
|
|
9
|
Copy of
representation to the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge.
|
01.04.2011
|
6
|
|
|
10
|
Affidavit.
|
--
|
-
|
|
|
11
|
Vakalatnama.
|
--
|
-
|
|
Dt/- 4th April, 2011
(YOGESH
KUMAR SAXENA)
Advocate
Counsels for the Petitioners
Chamber no. 139, High
Court, Allahabad
IN
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LIST
OF DATES AND EVENTS
IN
CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2011
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India)
(DISTRICT
– BANDA)
Allahabad
Adhivakta Sangthan, Allahabad and another
-------------------------------------Petitioners
Versus
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
through its Registrar General
and others -------------------------------------Respondents
|
Sl.no.
|
Dates.
|
Events.
|
|
1
|
27.2.2010
|
The matter pertaining to the recruitment
on the post of Clerk/grade apprentices and stenographer was published in the
corrigendum under the signature of District Judge, Banda wherein 11 posts of
Clerk, 3 posts of paid apprentices and 2 posts of stenographer were
published.
|
|
2
|
27.2.2011
|
Examination on the post of Clerk/grade
apprentices and stenographer was published in the corrigendum under the
signature of District Judge, Banda wherein 11 posts of Clerk, 3 posts of paid
apprentices and 2 posts of stenographer were held.
|
|
3
|
14.3.2011
|
Meeting of the selection committee was
convened in the office/residence of District Judge, Banda at about 6.00 P.M.
and thereafter the District Judge/ Chairman of committee proceed on medical
leave.
|
|
4
|
13/16.3.2011
|
The advertisement/ corrigendum so
published in the judgeship of Bareilly on 13.3.2011 and on 16.3.2011, wherein
Form-A in Appendix-I was published as the applicants seeking appointment may
get the Proforma application as per the requirement of Rule 10 of such
advertisement and fundamental rights guaranteed to the applicants under
Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India read with Article 309 may be
protected.
|
|
5
|
16.3.2011
|
It was decided by the Hon’ble inspecting
judge that the answer-books should be evaluated in the supervision of
Registry of High Court at the Guest House Drumond Road, Allahabad of
judgeship Banda.
|
|
6
|
16.3.2011
|
The District Judge deputed 4 officers
namely Sri Avanish Saxena, Special (DAAA) Banda, Sri S.K. Vishwakarma Special
Judge (E.C. Act) Banda, Sri Devendra Singh Addl. District Judge, Banda and
Sri Sudeep Jaiswal, Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda.
|
|
7
|
17.3.2011
|
At about 6.00 A.M. these Four Officers
alongwith class-III employee Mahendra Kumar and two class-IV employees (for
security reason) handed over the seal box to Sri P.K. Srivastava and Sri
Ajeet Singh O.S.D’s of Allahabad High Court containing the answer-sheets. On
the said date the committee members expressed their desire to codify the
copies before handing over them to the O.S.D. of Allahabad High Court, but
the Hon’ble inspecting judge was of view that coding and decoding shall
vested the time of Allahabad judgeship and monitoring of the process was done
under the O.S.D. of the Registry of Allahabad High Court.
|
|
8
|
17.3.2011
|
Five officers of Allahabad judgeship were
engaged in the evaluation of the answer-books alongwith four members of the
committee constituted by the District Judge Banda.
|
|
9
|
18.3.2011
|
None of the officers of the judgeship
Banda remained for the evaluation of the answer sheet as coding and decoding
of the answer sheet was not been done and new officers namely Sri Alok Kumar
Mukarjee, Sri Sitaram Nigam, Sri A.K. Singh, Sri Subedar Yadav and Sri
Faridul Haq all A.D.J. at Allahabad judgeship were deputed for evaluation of
the answer sheet.
|
|
10
|
23/28.3.2011
|
Other officers of Allahabad Judgeship
were deputed for evaluation process of the answer sheet under the vigilance
of Hon’ble Inspecting judge and two other officers namely Sri B.D. Naqvi and
Sri R.P. Singh of District Banda, who were not the member of the committee
and were under transfer to other District have been deputed for evaluation of
the answer sheet and thereafter the merit list of the examination of Clerk,
paid apprentices and stenographer were prepared by Hon’ble inspecting judge.
|
|
11
|
29.3.2011
|
The final list of the selected candidates
from amongst the general category, in which six candidate belonging to O.B.C.
category were inserted amongst which one Sri A.K. Verma O.B.C. was beyond the
prescribed age of the cut of date, but he has been selected as a general
candidate by misrepresentation of the judgement reported in 2002 (3) U.P.L.B.
& E.C. page 2304. Thus the entire selection process was done without
jurisdiction in a prejudicial manner by an authority who is no within the
judgeship of District Banda and thereby contrary to Rules of 1947 applicable
for the said selection.
|
|
12
|
30.3.2011
|
The result has been declared of the said
selection process on the basis of final list prepared by the Hon’ble
inspecting judge of judgeship Banda.
|
|
13
|
01.04.2011
|
The representation has been prepared for
submitting the same with a request not to give effect to the selection
process to the present Hon’ble inspecting judge taken over the charge from
his predecessor.
|
Dt/- 4th April, 2011
(YOGESH
KUMAR SAXENA)
Advocate
Counsels for the
Petitioners
Chamber no. 139, High
Court, Allahabad
IN
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO. OF 2011
(Under Section 151 of the
C.P.C.)
On behalf of
Allahabad
Adhivakta Sangthan, Allahabad and another
-----------------------Applicants/Petitioners
IN
CIVIL
MISC. WRIT PETITION NO.
OF 2011
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India)
(DISTRICT – BANDA)
1.
Allahabad Adhivakta Sangthan, Allahabad (Registered
Under Society Registration Act bearing No. 479 of 1998) through its Secretary
Radhey Shyam Pandey Advocate.
2.
Radhey Shyam Pandey (Advocate) Registration
No.3919/1983, s/o Shri D.P. Pandey r/o 396-C/9 Chandpur Salori, Allahabad
--------------------------Petitioners
Versus
1.
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
through its Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad.
2.
Selection Committee Ministerial Staff Establishment
(Class III Post) Judgeship, District Banda through its Chaiman, District Judge,
Banda.
3.
State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary
Law and Justice, Secretariat, Lucknow.
-------------------------Respondents
To,
The Hon’ble the Chief Justice and
his other companion Judges of the aforesaid court.
The humble application of the above
named applicant/ petitioners most respectfully showeth as under: -
1.
That the full facts and circumstances of
the case have been given in the accompanying writ petition, it is expedient in
the interest of justice that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay
the effect and operation of the minutes of the selection committee (Annexure
no.4 to the writ petition) and implementation of the result so declared on
30.3.2011 (Annexure no.5 to the writ petition) during the pendency of the
present writ petition. And/or pass such other suitable order or direction,
which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the present circumstances
of the case.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed
that this Hon’ble Court
may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the minutes of
the selection committee (Annexure no.4 to the writ petition) and implementation
of the result so declared on 30.3.2011 (Annexure no.5 to the writ petition)
during the pendency of the present writ petition. And/or pass such other
suitable order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the present circumstances of the case.
Dt/- 4th April, 2011 (YOGESH
KUMAR SAXENA)
Advocate
Counsels for the
Petitioners
Chamber no. 139,
High Court, Allahabad
IN
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CIVIL
MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2011
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India)
(DISTRICT – BANDA)
1.
Allahabad Adhivakta Sangthan, Allahabad, (Registered
Under Society Registration Act bearing No. 479 of 1998) through its Secretary
Radhey Shyam Pandey Advocate.
2.
Radhey Shyam Pandey (Advocate) Registration
No.3919/1983, s/o Shri D.P. Pandey r/o 396-C/9 Chandpur Salori, Allahabad
--------------------------Petitioners
Versus
1.
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
through its Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad.
2.
Selection Committee Ministerial Staff
Establishment (Class III Post) Judgeship, District Banda through its Chaiman,
District Judge, Banda.
3.
State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary
Law and Justice, Secretariat, Lucknow -------------------------Respondents
To,
The Hon’ble the Chief Justice and
his other companion Judges of the aforesaid court.
The
humble writ petition of the above named petitioners most respectfully showeth
as under: -
1.
That this is the first Public Interest
Litigation /Social Action Litigation pertaining to the wider objective in
relations to the process of recruitment of Ministerial Staff to the subordinate
offices in furtherance of its recruitment rules promulgated in exercise of
power conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and no other
writ petition against same cause of action has been filed or pending before
this Hon’ble Court. The petitioners have not received any notice of caveat
application on behalf of respondents till today in the present writ petition.
2.
That the petitioners are the Association of
Advocates registered under the Society Registration Act with the objective to
fight against the prevailing maladies prevalent in the day to day functioning
of the Hon’ble Courts and to dealt with the problem of the litigants in
relations to the procedural requirement by helping them in the different
judgeship of the State of Uttar Pradesh by representing their grievances before
the Hon’ble High Court as the members Advocate assigned with such a
responsibility are not only the Advocates for earning their livelihood, but to
create an atmosphere of creditability, as advocacy is not a craft, trade or a
business, but certainly a calling of the conscience of the transparency to
enshrine noble profession.
3.
That the petitioner no.1 and 2 are the same
person and they have been impleaded in the representative capacity on behalf of
members of registered association as well as in the individual capacity as the
matter may be represented before the majesty of the Hon’ble Court regarding the
selection process of District Banda. The endeavor to have the uniform policy in
the matter of the recruitment of the ministerial establishment in the entire
Uttar Pradesh under the uniformity of the judgeship is made.
4.
That there is no personal interest of the
members of the association, but certainly if the agencies out side the purview
of the legislative competence are deployed for the recruitment of the Clerk,
paid apprentices and stenographer by the selection process conducted by Hon’ble
inspecting judge, the command of the respect required to be conveyed to the
particular judgeship under whose subordination these Class-III posts employees
may start posing themselves for above to their status as is being felt by the
members of petitioner’s association and there is also the possibility of
insubordination with the members of the Advocate, which is seen in the present
atmosphere and as such without having any aspersion, derogation to the
authority of the Hon’ble Court by having full respect towards the Hon’ble
Judges, the present Public Interest Litigation has been in the larger interest
of the society.
5.
That at the vary out set it is submitted
that the functioning of the “Government” as enshrined under Article 309 of the
Constitution of India are executive functions of the State Government. The
rules so formulated in exercise of such power conferred the jurisdiction to
different authorities, holding their obligation and duties towards the
recruitment and condition of service of persons serving in Union
or a State Government.
6.
That it has been laid down that subject to
the provisions of constitution, acts of the appropriate legislation may
regulate the recruitment and service of the persons appointed to public
services and posts in connection with affairs of Union
or of any State. The power to make rules regulating the recruitment and
conditions of service of persons appointed to such services and posts until
provisions in that behalf is made by or under in act or the appropriate
legislation under this Article.
7.
That under preamble of the Constitution the
basic structure of our constitution, which can not be amended in exercise of
power conferred therein in the separation of powers impliedly if not explicit
and thus the power conferred for executive functionary under the State has an
overriding effect to act independently without any interference or intervention
by the external authority to whom the power has not been vested under our
constitution.
8.
That in case of the infractions taken by
one authority shall be dealt with excessive transgression of discretionary
power vested with the supervisory functioning under the scheme of administration.
9.
That Chapter-VI dealt with the subject of
subordinate courts out constitution. The appointment of District Judge is
conferred under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, wherein the
recruitment of the persons other than District Judge to judicial services is
conferred under the scheme of constitution after consultation with State Public
Service Commission and with the High Court exercising jurisdiction in relations
to such scheme under Article 234 of the Constitution of India.
10.
That the control of over the subordinate
courts to the persons belonging to judicial services of the State inferior to
the post of District Judge shall be within the purview of the High Court, but
the same shall not be construed as taken away for any such person may right of
appeal, which he may have under the law regulating the conditions of services
or as authority of High Court to deem with him, otherwise then in accordance
with condition of service prescribed under such law.
11.
That the Subordinate Civil Courts
Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947 published vide notification No.
2494/VII-G-12-40 dated August 1, 1947 were promulgated and thereafter the rules
in exercise of the power conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution of
India came into existence in U.P. Gazette Part-1A dated 15th July,
1950. It has been further amended vide notification published in U.P. Gazette
on 26.11.1966.
12.
That under the definition clause the
definition of “Ministerial Establishment” means the staff of Subordinate Civil
Court constituting of ministerial servants as defined in fundamental rule 9
(17) of Financial Hand Book- II Part- II.
13.
That under Rule 3 the strength of the
ministerial establishment shall form a unit under the “judgeship”, but
stenographer shall form a separate cadre vide notification no.
1696/VII-612-A-40 dated March 27, 1953 the recruitment of stenographer is
subject to the previous approval of High Court.
14.
That it is provided that District Judge may
from time to time with concurrence of High Court or the Chief Court of our Oudh
as the case may be, leave unfilled vacancy or the Governor may hold in abeyance
or abolish any vacant post.
15.
That the application for recruitment shall
be invited by District Judge in the Form-A in Appendix-I by advertising in the
newspapers having circulation in the locality wherein number of the candidates
to be recruited and date of examination is prescribed.
16.
That according to Rule-11 of the aforesaid
Rules, 1947, which were amended in the year 1969, the recruitment shall be
based on result of the competitive examination and interview by District Judge
at Headquarter of judgeship in the manner prescribed in Appendix-II. However,
the District Judge may delegate by or more function other than function of
interviewing the candidate to a Senior Judge.
17.
That under Rule 15 all the appointments to
the ministerial establishment shall be made by District Judge except in the
case of stenographer subject to the provisions of Rule 12.
18.
That under the same Rule 15 the aggrieved
person by any order or the appointment made, otherwise then in accordance with
the Rules shall has a right of appeal of the High Court or to the Chief Court
of Oudh as the case may be.
19.
That Article 225 of the Constitution of
India deals with the jurisdiction of existing High Court and respective power
of judges thereof in relations to the administration of justice in the court,
including any power to make rules of court and to regulate the sitting of the
court.
20.
That in exercise of the power conferred by
Article 225 of the Constitution of India, Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 has
been promulgated.
21.
That the power of the executive and
administrative business of the court are conferred under Chapter-III of
aforesaid High Court Rules, 1952, wherein the inspecting judge as nominated by
Hon’ble Chief Justice and assigned to a particular session Division to each
Hon’ble Judges as inspecting judge of that division for a period of one year.
However, in the given situation the Hon’ble Chief Justice may assign more than
one session division to one inspecting judge, who shall proceed in inspection
in consultation with District Judge.
22.
That it is provided that inspecting judge
will not ordinarily devote more than 5 working days for annual inspection.
23.
That the allocation of executive and
administrative work between Hon’ble Chief Justice, inspecting judge, the
administrative committee and full court has been prescribed under Chapter-III
Rule 4 of High Court Rules, wherein the inspecting judge is only empowered to
review of judicial working of subordinate courts and to record entries in
character-roll of the officers posted in the division assigned to the
inspecting judge.
24.
That there has not been any power to the
inspecting judge to play any role in the recruitment of subordinate ministerial
staff by having the establishment of a judgeship under the Subordinate Civil
Court Ministerial Establishment Rules as the District Judge alone has got the
jurisdiction in the matter of recruitment of ministerial staff of the
subordinate offices in Uttar Pradesh.
25.
That the power in respect of the matter
conferred upon the administrative committee and the matter for the full court
may not be exercise by the inspecting judges in absence of any such power
conferred upon them under the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.
26.
That the functioning of the High Court
regarding the sitting of the judges for allocation of their works allotted to
them by order of Hon’ble Chief Justice in accordance with his lordship’s
direction under Chapter V of aforesaid Rules.
27.
That in this manner the inspecting judge
has been excluded under the scheme of legislation in the matter of recruitment
of ministerial staff of the subordinate offices in the State of Uttar Pradesh, wherein
the power is conferred only to the District Judge of the particular judgeship
in accordance with the Service Rules.
28.
That the matter pertaining to the
recruitment on the post of Clerk/grade apprentices and stenographer was
published in the corrigendum under the signature of District Judge, Banda
wherein 11 posts of Clerk, 3 posts of paid apprentices and 2 posts of
stenographer were published. The true copy of the advertisement dated 27.2.2010
published in the newspaper is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure no.1 to this writ
petition.
29.
That according to the advertisement so
published as per the requirement of Rule 10, there has been requirement to
publish shall have the Proforma-A under Rule 10 in Appendix-I in more many
newspapers (more than one) circulating in the locality, but the Proforma-A as
prescribed under Rule 10 of Rules, 1947 has not been done, nor it was published
in the different newspapers of the locality and the same was published in
Dainik Jagran, Kanpur Edition and in Times of India in Lucknow Edition on
27/28.2.2010.
30.
That the petitioner is filing the Photostat
copy of the extract of newspaper in relations to the advertisement/ corrigendum
so published in the judgeship of Bareilly on 13.3.2011 and on 16.3.2011,
wherein Form-A in Appendix-I was published as the applicants seeking
appointment may get the Proforma application as per the requirement of Rule 10
of such advertisement and fundamental rights guaranteed to the applicants under
Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India read with Article 309 may be
protected. The true Photostat copy of the exemplar advertisement of District
Judgeship Bareilly having Form-A Appendix-I dated 13/16.3.2011 is being filed
herewith and marked as Annexure no.2 to this writ petition.
31.
That it is relevant to point out here that
the setting of the question paper was done in such a manner having the two
marks for each questions were quite predictable and it has been found that
after the completion of the examination, there were the information conveyed to
the prospective applicants appearing in the examination regarding the
preconceived answers known to the candidates appearing with an assurance of
getting them successful in the examination. The true copy of the question paper
having the questions set up of two marks each compulsorily attended is being
filed herewith and marked as Annexure
no.3 to this writ petition.
32.
That in the recruitment process conducted
in the judgeship of Banda, the norms prescribed in relations to the Proforma
application for the recruitment of the candidates seeking appointment on the
post of ministerial staff has not been furnished to such candidates as per
requirement of law. The same has been done in casual manner by District Judge, Banda
apparently on the basis of instructions given by him by the Hon’ble inspecting
judge, which has been recorded in writing in minutes of selection committee.
33.
That the individual candidates were
required to deposit Rs. 25/- for obtaining the copy of Proforma Appendix-I
under Rule 10, for which there is no such procedure prescribed under Subordinate
Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947.
34.
That number of applicants seeking
employment could not pay participation thereof on account of fact that they
were required to travel from different part of State of Uttar Pradesh upto the
judgeship of District Banda and as per the norms prescribed by subordinate
staff under domain of judgeship Banda the Form-A could not be published for
seeking employment to the prospective applicants by judgeship Banda. Some of
the applicants could have not been able to deposit their form due to rigmarole
of technicality enunciated in this regard up to time prescribed on 30.3.2010.
35.
That in the minutes of selection committee
every detail has been prescribed, it has been laid down that there is no
provision of interview in the Rules regulating recruitment of Class-II employee
in the judgeship wherein Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment
Rules, 1947, the rules in relations to the recruitment of ministerial staff of
subordinate offices in Uttar Pradesh, 1950 and circular dated January 2, 1987
issued by High Court in this regard is prescribed. The true Photostat copy of
the minutes of selection committee is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure no.4 to this writ
petition.
36.
That the Examination on the post of
Clerk/grade apprentices and stenographer was published in the corrigendum under
the signature of District Judge, Banda wherein 11 posts of Clerk, 3 posts of
paid apprentices and 2 posts of stenographer were held. Meeting of the
selection committee was convened in the office/residence of District Judge,
Banda at about 6.00 P.M. and thereafter the District Judge/ Chairman of
committee proceed on medical leave.
37.
That the advertisement/ corrigendum so
published in the judgeship of Bareilly on 13.3.2011 and on 16.3.2011, wherein
Form-A in Appendix-I was published as the applicants seeking appointment may
get the Proforma application as per the requirement of Rule 10 of such
advertisement and fundamental rights guaranteed to the applicants under Article
14 and 16 of the Constitution of India read with Article 309 may be protected. It
was decided by the Hon’ble inspecting judge that the answer-books should be
evaluated in the supervision of Registry of High Court at the Guest House Drummond
Road, Allahabad of judgeship Banda.
38.
That It was decided by the Hon’ble
inspecting judge that the answer-books should be evaluated in the supervision
of Registry of High Court at the Guest House Drumond Road, Allahabad of
judgeship Banda. The District Judge deputed 4 officers namely Sri Avanish
Saxena, Special (DAAA) Banda, Sri S.K. Vishwakarma Special Judge (E.C. Act)
Banda, Sri Devendra Singh Addl. District Judge, Banda and Sri Sudeep Jaiswal,
Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda. At about 6.00 A.M. these Four Officers
alongwith class-III employee Mahendra Kumar and two class-IV employees (for
security reason) handed over the seal box to Sri P.K. Srivastava and Sri Ajeet
Singh O.S.D’s of Allahabad High Court containing the answer-sheets. On the said
date the committee members expressed their desire to codify the copies before
handing over them to the O.S.D. of Allahabad High Court, but the Hon’ble
inspecting judge was of view that coding and decoding shall vested the time of
Allahabad judgeship and monitoring of the process was done under the O.S.D. of
the Registry of Allahabad High Court.
39.
That Five officers of Allahabad judgeship
were engaged in the evaluation of the answer-books alongwith four members of
the committee constituted by the District Judge Banda. None of the officers of
the judgeship Banda remained for the evaluation of the answer sheet as coding
and decoding of the answer sheet was not been done and new officers namely Sri
Alok Kumar Mukarjee, Sri Sitaram Nigam, Sri A.K. Singh, Sri Subedar Yadav and
Sri Faridul Haq all A.D.J. at Allahabad judgeship were deputed for evaluation
of the answer sheet.
40.
That Other officers of Allahabad Judgeship
were deputed for evaluation process of the answer sheet under the vigilance of
Hon’ble Inspecting judge and two other officers namely Sri B.D. Naqvi and Sri
R.P. Singh of District Banda, who were not the member of the committee and were
under transfer to other District have been deputed for evaluation of the answer
sheet and thereafter the merit list of the examination of Clerk, paid
apprentices and stenographer were prepared by Hon’ble inspecting judge.
41.
That the final list of the selected
candidates from amongst the general category, in which six candidate belonging
to O.B.C. category were inserted amongst which one Sri A.K. Verma O.B.C. was
beyond the prescribed age of the cut of date, but he has been selected as a
general candidate by misinterpretation of the judgement reported in 2002 (3)
U.P.L.B. & E.C. page 2304. Thus the entire selection process was done
without jurisdiction in a prejudicial manner by an authority who is no within
the judgeship of District Banda and thereby contrary to Rules of 1947
applicable for the said selection.
42.
That the petitioner has been advised to
submit that there is a particular procedure has been prescribed to be
accomplished for given effect to the process of recruitment, the same cannot be
modified simply on account of fact that the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge of
aforesaid judgeship of District Banda may regulate the entire process for which
only District Judge of said judgeship is prescribed to accomplish.
43.
That it is very surprising that even the
Roll numbers have been allotted to the different candidates appearing in the
said written examination were the number prescribed on Form-A meant for
submitting the application as per Appendix-I under Rule 10 of the aforesaid
Rules and in this manner if the individuals purchasing the Proforma on its
prescribed Form-A under Rule 10 are purchasing the aforesaid Forms in bulk
amongst the particular group of individual applying in recruitment process,
their sitting arrangement shall have the possibility of getting mal-practices
being conducted in copying the answer, which were codified in such a manner
that answer-sheet can be seen by other candidate sitting in the same room.
44.
That the answer-sheets were also being
procured from market as any one can purchase the same and put the seal there
under as to get manipulation in the said examination and as such the Roll
numbers should have been allotted afresh according to the requirement of the
statutory provisions and the existing system followed in the other competitive
examinations.
45.
That even the coding and decoding of the
answer-books as per the instruction of Chairman of judgeship of District Banda,
who was chairman of selection committee has not been done on instruction of Hon’ble
Inspecting Judge.
46.
That the petitioner’s association is failed
to understand that when a particular recruitment process confined to a
particular judgeship of District Banda is prescribed to have been performed by
its District Judge, what was the occasion of having such an interest being
taken by the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge in monitoring the answer-sheets from the
examiners out side the aforesaid District. It is submitted that it has been
written so many times that the strict vigilance was maintained by the O.S.D. at
Drumond Road, Allahabad wherein the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge always shown his
gratitude by having his all time presence during the course of scrutiny from
the officers posted in District Allahabad on the post of Additional District
Judges, who were not assigned any such responsibility by the District Judge,
Banda. Thus the conclusion drawn in the process of the recruitment of the
aforesaid selection is that the analogy applicable by the maxim “Show me the
man, and I will make the rule to accommodate him”. The same has been adopted by
the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge out side the purview of his jurisdiction vested in
accordance with his functioning under the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.
47.
That the officers Sri B.D. Naqvi and Sri
R.P. Singh posted as A.D.J. in the judgeship of District Banda were not even
the members assigned with the said responsibility by the District Judge, but
for all the time to proceed in the matter of the process of evaluation, their
presence has been shown on behalf of the District Judge of judgeship Banda
without them not being the member of the selection process even under the
delegated power of the District Judge Banda. Thus the entire selection process
was loosing the full credencibility in respect of its procedure. Both these
officers were not given any such responsibility to become the member of the
selection committee by the Chairman of Examination Committee/ District Judge,
Banda as both these officers were already undergoing to transfer to some other
District.
48.
That the examination result has been
displayed on the Notice Board wherein ineligible candidate having not even the
prescribed age of 35 years amenable for the general candidate has been
followed, but in the general category of the selected list of the candidates, 6
candidates from O.B.C. reserved category have been inserted and thereby in the
entire process of the aforesaid selection the representation to the O.B.C.
candidate has become disproportionate in
its number defeating the vary objective of providing the reservation in
accordance with the requirement of U.P. Act No.4 of 1994. The waiting list for
the anticipated vacancy has also been published which clearly demonstrate that
some of the employee posted in Class-III post have been sought to be transferred
to the other judgeship and in anticipation of such vacancy the candidate
alleged to have been selected have become disproportionate to the post
advertised. The true copy of the result of the selection as displayed on
30.3.2011 is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure no.5 to this writ petition.
49.
That the entire process of evaluation was
done in such a haste manner as the appointment may be given to the chosen one
before completion of the tenure of one year by the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge. It
is submitted that in this process not only the vacancies notified have been
filled up, but also the vacancy anticipated after transfer of some of the
employee from judgeship Banda to other District, the same has also been taken
into consideration by the erstwhile Hon’ble Inspecting Judge who remain no more
the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge of judgeship Banda, but Hon’ble Justice Sri R.D.
Khare has resumed the responsibility on the said post after 31.3.2011. The
representation submitted by the petitioner association to the present Hon’ble
Inspecting Judge dated 1.4.2011 with the request not to given effect the
posting to the selected candidate is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure no.6 to this writ
petition.
50.
That the posting of the individual so
selected has not been done as the copy of the representation submitted by the
petitioner’s association has been addressed to the judgeship Banda. It has come
to the notice of petitioner’s association that some clarification has been
sought in respect of the selection to the candidates who have exceeded to the
upper age limit and there is only the 13 posts
51.
That there has been the instances of
pointing out the finger regarding the integrity of the Hon’ble Judges of the
High Courts and in such a situation when everything has been done by flouting
the statutory provisions, the charge of malafide exercise of the power by
exercising the pernicious influence without transparency in the process of the
selection may be leveled against the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge as every one in
the judgeship Banda has become conversant that a huge amount of the money has
been taken for given appointment on the post of the Clerk, paid apprentices and
stenographer, who will subsequently get themselves transferred to the other
District judgeship and the anticipated vacancies shall be filled up from
amongst the candidates qualifying in the said examination whose names are shown
in the waiting list of the successful candidate in the said examination.
52.
That the fraud avoids all the judicial acts
and power exercised by committing the fraud upon the statutory authority having
the competence of legislative sanction under Article 309 are not subjected to
be circumvented, nullified, prejudiced and interfered with by the power
conferred to the Hon’ble Inspecting Judges of that particular judgeship as
these Hon’ble Inspecting Judges cannot function as a repository to the High
Court functioning for which only the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the State of
Uttar Pradesh is empowered to have its administrative control through the
administrative committee or by the full court as per the power conferred under
the Allahabad High Court Rules promulgated in exercise of power conferred under
Article 225 of the Constitution of India.
53.
That who ever he may be holding the highest
position in the hierarchy for administration of the justice, but the law done
not empower any such authority to act beyond the prescribed limit of the
jurisdiction conferred to the said authority, as it has rightly been said that
who ever he may be, but the law is above such authority. Thus the entire
recruitment process of the selection of class- III employees in the judgeship
of District Banda are bias with legal malafide and the fraud on power has been
committed in the aforesaid selection in such a manner that even the relaxation
of age has been granted beyond the
permissible limit to the candidate so selected as that of the employee of the
general category, while the eligible candidates have been deprived of their
bonafide rights of the employment, which is conferred to them in the fair
selection process under the judgeship of District Banda.
54.
That the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge at the
most may look into the matter when the complaint in respect of the recruitment
process and the manner of the selection are made by the affected parties having
their grievances, who may have their locus standi to file their Appeal, but if
the appellate authority himself may assume the jurisdiction conferred with the
statutory authority, the same shall be violated of the settled principle of
law. Thus the entire process of selection is vitiated by the colourable
exercise of the jurisdiction which was not vested with the Hon’ble Inspecting
Judge appointed for looking after the functioning of the judicial work assigned
to the judicial officers in the judgeship of District Banda only for his tenure
of one year, which has now come to an end.
55.
That the two phrase contemplated under
Article 14 namely equality before law and equal protection before law may
convey the similar gesture, but the objective hidden behind these Articles is
to get the equal treatment not only in accordance with the substantive law
without discrimination, but the processual manner prescribed in the procedural
law are strictly to be followed in the matter of recruitment, otherwise the
entire process of selection conducted by Hon’ble Inspecting Judge without
having any consultation with the District Judge of judgeship of Banda will
become automatically vitiated on account of virus of vices resulting in the failure
of justice and transgression of the discretionary authority vested to the
authority empowered to act under the statutory provisions.
56.
That in this manner, if any, attribution
regarding the functioning of Hon’ble Inspecting Judge is not assigned with any
attribution regarding aspersions, the conclusion is inescapable that a bizarre
exercise of acquiring the power contrary to the requirement of statutory
provisions contemplated under the aforesaid rules in the matter of recruitment
has been done, which is recorded in the minutes of selection committee and if
the transgression of discretionary power resulting in infraction of statutory
rules prescribed in this regard has been done, the same may tantamount to be
malafide exercise of power.
57.
That in the recent
pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, fairness and transparency have
been held to be the essential requirements of the selection process in all the
employments. It is reliably learnt (as
is available on internet) that the Chairman of the Selection Committee had
specifically directed at the initial stage of the selection process for the
codification of the answer books. This
was all the more important for the reason that the distribution of the forms
was made on the basis of the serialization of its numbers of the forms and
interestingly the same number as provided on the serial of the forms was
allocated as the Roll number. This left
no scope for doubt that the roll number of the candidates were all to well known
and even during the examination process the serialized clubbing of convenient
group of the candidates for mutual benefit was also possible in cluster in the
examination room by merely choosing the option of purchasing the forms in bulk
on the same day by few candidates. This situation was extremely dangerous and
was totally obliterating the possibilities of any transparent or fair process
of examination. In this backdrop it was
all the more necessary that the codification of the answer books must have been
done. It is also learnt that for some
strange reasons this direction of the Chairman was bypassed/ overlooked
rendering the entire process of selection not only motivated, but, also full of
vice of extraneous consideration and ulterior motivations.
58.
That it has also
been learnt that the instructions regarding codification were withdrawn under
the instructions of the Hon'ble Administrative Judge as explained by the
Members of the Selection Committee in their minutes submitted by them. This fact deserves to be examined by this
Hon'ble Court by summoning the original records of the process of selection and
if it is found correct, it would be sufficient to nullify very basis of the
piety and validity of the selection process.
59.
That the secrecy
of the identity of the candidate is a golden principle to ensure the
transparency and fair play in the examination process. A somersault on this aspect of codification
and two divergent instructions issued by the Chairman and the Hon'ble
Administrative Judge on the same subject speak volumes of exterior interference
in the process of selection, which makes it clear that the process was neither
independent, nor was it above influence.
Since these divergent instructions are the part of the report submitted
by the selection committee, as is being reliably learnt, it is all the more
desirable that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to summon the original
records of the process of selection to examine that as to what were those
compelling circumstances which necessitated the possibility of undoing of an
instruction issued by the Chairman at the initial stage regarding codification,
which could be a key to the fair marking of the candidates.
60.
That this is
established law that the lit of the selected candidates has to be prepared on
the basis of the vacancies available on the date of the notification. No list can be prepared including the waiting
list with regard to hypothetical possibilities of the vacancies in future. In the present case waiting list has also
been prepared and published to cater to the requirements of the future
vacancies, which are likely to happen, which admittedly did not exist on the
date of the notification of the advertisement for selection and are totally
hypothetical in nature. This is evident
on the record , which is sufficient to render the entire process of selection
totally unconstitutional, illegal, bad in law and vitiates the bonafide of the
process of selection and renders the same a clear case of selection, suffering
from the vice of ulterior motivations.
61.
That the fairness in action must at least
be perceptible, if not transparent. The selection process are contemplated
under recruitment rules according to Ministerial Establishment of a judgeship,
but the Hon’ble administrative judge has taken the entire process after given
up the process of decoding in the District Allahabad itself.
62.
That it is contemplated under the rules
that recruitment process shall be based on result of competitive examination
conducted by the District Judge at headquarter of judgeship and registration of
the selected candidate shall be entered in the order of merit in bound register
in Form-B prescribed in Appendix-I and each entry shall be initialed and dated
by District Judge after he has inspected original copies of certificate, but in
the present case even if according to minutes of selection committee details,
if it is accepted that four others were deputed on 16.3.2011 and one Class-III
and two Class IV employees were so assigned to get the scrutiny of answer-books, there has been the
necessity of sending the entire answer-sheet to another judgeship of District
Allahabad and to get induction of five officers suo motto for judgeship of
Allahabad for evaluation of copies/ answer-books on 17.3.2011 alongwith four
delegated officers assigned in this regard from 12.00 noon to 5.00 P.M.
63.
That the O.S.D’s of registry of High Court
Allahabad were monitoring the process and were keeping tied vigil on the
examiners who were officers of the rank of Additional District Judge and the
said reason has been given for avoiding the process of decoding. It is
submitted that O.S.D. of registry of Allahabad High Court were not empowered
for keeping tied vigil upon the Additional District Judges, who were engaged on
evaluation of copies on 17.3.2011 and thereafter at Drummond Road Guest House
of Allahabad High Court.
64.
That on the subsequent date none of the
deputed Additional District Judge namely Sri Avanish Saxena, Sri S.K.
Vishwakarma, Sri Devendra Singh and Sri Sudeep Jaiswal were present, but one
Sri R.P. Singh Additional District Judge, Banda was invited to break the seal
of main suit and seal of the room, which was contrary to the requirement.
65.
That the jurisdiction of judgeship
Allahabad is assigned to Hon’ble Justice Sri Prakash Krishna J, but under the
instruction of the administrative judge of judgeship Banda, who remain in said
office only up to 31.3.2011, the entire process of evaluation of the copies of
answer-sheets of about 2700 candidates were done in such a haste manner by
contemplating the transparency therein by administrative judge himself, which
is contrary to objective sought to be achieved and in such a situation the
conclusion is inescapable that the entire process of evaluation of
answer-sheets has been done to get the evaluation of the copies from 18.3.2011
up to 28.3.2011.
66.
That the merit list so prepared is having
the name of the candidate namely Mr. Ajay Kumar Verma in the list of general
candidate, who was belonging to the Other Backward Class category and has taken
the benefit of age relaxation from being 35 years as on dated 1.7.2009, but he
was admittedly 38 years 9 months 15 days on such date. There has 6 Other
Backward Class candidates belonging to the candidate applying for reserved
category, but they have been illegally included as a candidate of general
cadre. Thus the entire selection process is per se illegal, void and without
jurisdiction.
67.
That in the case of Narendra Prasad Singh
Versus D.G.P. 2002 (3) U.P.L.B. & E.C. Page 2304 the aforesaid case in
respect of the provisions of section 3 (6) of the U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994,
wherein no such benefit of the relaxation of age has been given in the open
competition against unreserved vacancy, but the same has been done under the
instruction of Hon’ble Inspecting Judge.
68.
That in this regard the qualification for
certain post is rational differentia under Article 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India, wherein age relaxation to some of the selected candidate
in the general category resulting in reverse discrimination to the rights of
the prospective candidates may not be given effect against the settled
principles of law and the statutory safeguard enunciated in this regard.
69.
That where the power is conferred to any
authority to act in exercise of such power with the statutory provisions, the
power so given under the law should have been exercised by the authority
competent to exercise such power and in case the Hon’ble inspecting judge has
not been conferred with any such power as to invade the authority of the
District Judge in the matter of selection of ministerial establishment of a
particular judgeship, the power so exercised under the guise of the
transparency in the selection process by scrutinizing the answer-sheet in other
District judgeship officers posted in the said District, the power shall be
deemed to be a colourable exercise of power.
70.
That in this manner it is therefore most
respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to
declare the entire minutes of selection committee (Annexure no.4 to the writ
petition) as null and void. It is further prayed that the examination of the
answer-sheets may be done within the judgeship of District Banda by the
competent selection/ examination committee of the ministerial establishment
under its Chairman/ District Judge, Banda as per the requirement of U.P.
Subordinate Civil Court Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947, U.P. Rules for
Recruitment of Ministerial Staff of subordinate offices in Uttar Pradesh, 1950
and Circular dated 2nd January, 1987 issued by Allahabad High Court
readwith U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994.
71.
That it is further prayed that as an
alternative prayer this Hon’ble Court administrative committee/ full court may
recommend uniform policy for the recruitment of the ministerial establishment
to the State Government for implementation as the supervisory jurisdiction
conferred under Article 225 of the Constitution of India may be exercised for
maintaining transparency in the selection process in the entire State of Uttar
Pradesh in accordance with the scheme and basic structure of our constitution.
72.
That the petitioners have got no other
equally effective and speedy alternative remedy except to approach this Hon’ble
Court by invoking its extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, inter-alia on the following amongst other grounds:
G R O U
N D S
a.
Because, the functioning of the
“Government” as enshrined under Article 309 of the Constitution of India are
executive functions of the State Government. The rules so formulated in
exercise of such power conferred the jurisdiction to different authorities,
holding their obligation and duties towards the recruitment and condition of
service of persons serving in Union or a State Government.
b.
Because, subject to the provisions of
constitution, acts of the appropriate legislation may regulate the recruitment
and service of the persons appointed to public services and posts in connection
with affairs of Union or of any State. The
power to make rules regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of
persons appointed to such services and posts until provisions in that behalf is
made by or under in act or the appropriate legislation under this Article.
c.
Because, under preamble of the Constitution
the basic structure of our constitution, which can not be amended in exercise
of power conferred therein in the separation of powers impliedly if not
explicit and thus the power conferred for executive functionary under the State
has an overriding effect to act independently without any interference or
intervention by the external authority to whom the power has not been vested
under our constitution.
d.
Because, the Subordinate Civil Courts
Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1947 published vide notification No.
2494/VII-G-12-40 dated August 1, 1947 were promulgated and thereafter the rules
in exercise of the power conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution of
India came into existence in U.P. Gazette Part-1A dated 15th July,
1950, which were further amended vide notification published in U.P. Gazette on
26.11.1966.
e.
Because, under Rule 3 the strength of the
ministerial establishment shall form a unit under the “judgeship”, but
stenographer shall form a separate cadre vide notification no.
1696/VII-612-A-40 dated March 27, 1953 the recruitment of stenographer is
subject to the previous approval of High Court.
f.
Because, the District Judge may from time
to time with concurrence of High Court or the Chief Court of our audh as the
case may be, leave unfilled vacancy or the Governor may hold in abeyance or
abolish any vacant post.
g.
Because, the application for recruitment
shall be invited by District Judge in the Form-A in Appendix-I by advertising
in the newspapers having circulation in the locality wherein number of the
candidates to be recruited and date of examination is prescribed.
h.
Because, according to Rule-11 of the
aforesaid Rules, 1947, which were amended in the year 1969, the recruitment
shall be based on result of the competitive examination and interview by
District Judge at Headquarter of judgeship in the manner prescribed in
Appendix-II. However, the District Judge may delegate by or more function other
than function of interviewing the candidate to a Senior Judge.
i.
Because, Article 225 of the Constitution of
India deals with the jurisdiction of existing High Court and respective power
of judges thereof in relations to the administration of justice in the court,
including any power to make rules of court and to regulate the sitting of the
court.
j.
Because, the power of the executive and
administrative business of the court are conferred under Chapter-III of
aforesaid High Court Rules, 1952, wherein the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge as
nominated by Hon’ble Chief Justice and assigned to a particular session
Division to each Hon’ble Judges as Hon’ble Inspecting Judge of that division
for a period of one year. However, in the given situation the Hon’ble Chief
Justice may assign more than one session division to one Hon’ble Inspecting
Judge, who shall proceed in inspection in consultation with District Judge.
k.
Because, there is a particular procedure
has been prescribed to be accomplished for given effect to the process of
recruitment, the same cannot be modified simply on account of fact that the Hon’ble
Inspecting Judge of aforesaid judgeship of District Banda may regulate the
entire process for which only District Judge of said judgeship is prescribed to
accomplish.
l.
Because, even the Roll numbers have been
allotted to the different candidates appearing in the said written examination
were the number prescribed on Form-A meant for submitting the application as
per Appendix-I under Rule 10 of the aforesaid Rules and in this manner if the
individuals purchasing the Proforma on its prescribed Form-A under Rule 10 are
purchasing the aforesaid Forms in bulk amongst the particular group of
individual applying in recruitment process, their sitting arrangement shall
have the possibility of getting mal-practices being conducted in copying the
answer, which were codified in such a manner that answer-sheet can be seen by
other candidate sitting in the same room.
m.
Because, the answer-sheets were also being
procured from market as any one can purchase the same and put the seal there
under as to get manipulation in the said examination and as such the Roll
numbers should have been allotted afresh according to the requirement of the
statutory provisions and the existing system followed in the other competitive
examinations.
n.
Because, even the coding and decoding of
the answer-books as per the instruction of Chairman of judgeship of District
Banda, who was chairman of selection committee has not been done on instruction
of Hon’ble Inspecting Judge.
o.
Because, the setting of the question paper
was done in such a manner having the two marks for each questions were quite
predictable and it has been found that after the completion of the examination,
there were the information conveyed to the prospective applicants appearing in
the examination regarding the preconceived answers known to the candidates
appearing with an assurance of getting them successful in the examination.
p.
Because, the entire process of evaluation
was done in such a haste manner as the appointment may be given to the chosen
one before completion of the tenure of one year by the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge.
It is submitted that in this process not only the vacancies notified have been
filled up, but also the vacancy anticipated after transfer of some of the
employee from judgeship Banda to other District, the same has also been taken
into consideration by the erstwhile Hon’ble Inspecting Judge who remain no more
the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge of judgeship Banda, but Hon’ble Justice Sri R.D.
Khare has resumed the responsibility on the said post after 31.3.2011.
q.
Because, the fraud avoids all the judicial
acts and power exercised by committing the fraud upon the statutory authority
having the competence of legislative sanction under Article 309 are not
subjected to be circumvented, nullified, prejudiced and interfered with by the
power conferred to the Hon’ble Inspecting Judges of that particular judgeship
as these Hon’ble Inspecting Judges cannot function as a repositiory to the High
Court functioning for which only the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the State of
Uttar Pradesh is empowered to have its administrative control through the
administrative committee or by the full court as per the power conferred under
the Allahabad High Court Rules promulgated in exercise of power conferred under
Article 225 of the Constitution of India.
r.
Because, who ever he may be holding the
highest position in the hierarchy for administration of the justice, but the
law done not empower any such authority to act beyond the prescribed limit of
the jurisdiction conferred to the said authority, as it has rightly been said
that who ever he may be, but the law is above such authority. Thus the entire
recruitment process of the selection of class- III employees in the judgeship
of District Banda are bias with legal malafide and the fraud on power has been
committed in the aforesaid selection in such a manner that even the relaxation
of age has been granted beyond the
permissible limit to the candidate so selected as that of the employee of the
general category, while the eligible candidates have been deprived of their
bonafide rights of the employment, which is conferred to them in the fair
selection process under the judgeship of District Banda.
s.
Because, the Hon’ble Inspecting Judge at
the most may look into the matter when the complaint in respect of the
recruitment process and the manner of the selection are made by the affected
parties having their grievances, who may have their locus standi to file their
Appeal, but if the appellate authority himself may assume the jurisdiction
conferred with the statutory authority, the same shall be violated of the
settled principle of law. Thus the entire process of selection is vitiated by
the colourable exercise of the jurisdiction which was not vested with the Hon’ble
Inspecting Judge appointed for looking after the functioning of the judicial
work assigned to the judicial officers in the judgeship of District Banda only
for his tenure of one year, which has now come to an end.
t.
Because, the two phrase contemplated under
Article 14 namely equality before law and equal protection before law may
convey the similar gesture, but the objective hidden behind these Articles is
to get the equal treatment not only in accordance with the substantive law
without discrimination, but the processual manner prescribed in the procedural
law are strictly to be followed in the matter of recruitment, otherwise the
entire process of selection conducted by Hon’ble Inspecting Judge without
having any consultation with the District Judge of judgeship of Banda will
become automatically vitiated on account of virus of vices resulting in the
failure of justice and transgression of the discretionary authority vested to
the authority empowered to act under the statutory provisions.
u.
Because, the secrecy of the identity of the candidate is a golden principle to
ensure the transparency and fair play in the examination process. A somersault on this aspect of codification
and two divergent instructions issued by the Chairman and the Hon'ble
Administrative Judge on the same subject speak volumes of exterior interference
in the process of selection, which makes it clear that the process was neither
independent, nor was it above influence.
Since these divergent instructions are the part of the report submitted
by the selection committee, as is being reliably learnt, it is all the more
desirable that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to summon the original
records of the process of selection to examine that as to what were those
compelling circumstances which necessitated the possibility of undoing of an
instruction issued by the Chairman at the initial stage regarding codification,
which could be a key to the fair marking of the candidates.
v.
Because, the merit list so prepared is
having the name of the candidate namely Mr. Ajay Kumar Verma in the list of
general candidate, who was belonging to the Other Backward Class category and
has taken the benefit of age relaxation from being 35 years as on dated
1.7.2009, but he was admittedly 38 years 9 months 15 days on such date. There
has 6 Other Backward Class candidates belonging to the candidate applying for
reserved category, but they have been illegally included as a candidate of
general cadre. Thus the entire selection process is per se illegal, void and
without jurisdiction.
w.
Because, in the case of Narendra Prasad
Singh Versus D.G.P. 2002 (3) U.P.L.B. & E.C. Page 2304 the aforesaid case
in respect of the provisions of section 3 (6) of the U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994,
wherein no such benefit of the relaxation of age has been given in the open
competition against unreserved vacancy, but the same has been done under the
instruction of Hon’ble Inspecting Judge.
x.
Because, the qualification for certain post
is rational differentia under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India,
wherein age relaxation to some of the selected candidate in the general
category resulting in reverse discrimination to the rights of the prospective
candidates may not be given effect against the settled principles of law and
the statutory safeguard enunciated in this regard.
y.
Because, where the power is conferred to
any authority to act in exercise of such power with the statutory provisions,
the power so given under the law should have been exercised by the authority
competent to exercise such power and in case the Hon’ble Hon’ble Inspecting
Judge has not been conferred with any such power as to invade the authority of
the District Judge in the matter of selection of ministerial establishment of a
particular judgeship, the power so exercised under the guise of the
transparency in the selection process by scrutinizing the answer-sheet in other
District judgeship officers posted in the said District, the power shall be
deemed to be a colourable exercise of power.
z.
Because, in the case of Narendra Prasad
Singh Versus D.G.P. 2002 (3) U.P.L.B. & E.C. Page 2304 the aforesaid case
in respect of the provisions of section 3 (6) of the U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994,
wherein no such benefit of the relaxation of age has been given in the open
competition against unreserved vacancy, but the same has been done under the
instruction of Hon’ble Inspecting Judge.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed
that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to: -
(i)
Issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of certiorari quashing the minutes of the selection committee (Annexure
no.4 to the writ petition) and also the result so declared on 30.3.2011
(Annexure no.5 to the writ petition).
(ii)
Issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 / the State Government for
maintaining transparency in the selection process in the entire State of Uttar
Pradesh in accordance with the scheme framed under Article 225 and also in
accordance with basic structure of our constitution.
(iii)
Issue any other suitable order or direction,
which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances
of the case.
(iv)
To award the cost of the writ petition in
favour of the petitioners.
Dt/-
4th April, 2011 (YOGESH
KUMAR SAXENA)
Advocate
Counsels for the
Petitioners
Chamber no. 139, High Court, Allahabad
IN
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ANNEXURE NO.
IN
CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2011
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India)
(DISTRICT – BANDA)
Allahabad
Adhivakta Sangthan, Allahabad and another
-------------------------------------Petitioners
Versus
High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad through its Registrar General
and
others -------------------------------------Respondents
No comments:
Post a Comment