This order is challenged before this Court by the High Court.
In the District of Barabanki in Uttar Pradesh on 30th July, 2004 the District Judge, who is the appointing authority for Class III and Class IV of subordinate service in the Judicial Department, invited applications for appointment of Class III and Class IV employees i.e. Stenographer, driver, Clerks, Process Servers etc.
Aggrieved by this decision of the learned Single Judge, some of the candidates filed appeals before the Division Bench and the Division Bench, by the judgment dated 19th July, 2006 upheld the judgment of the learned Single Judge in part.
After the judgment of the Division Bench, the District Judge, Barabanki issued a fresh Notification on 8th October, 2006.
Leave granted in Special Leave Petition C Nos.14326/2006, 8815/2007 and 6780 of 2008.
One Stenographer, one driver and certain other posts were advertised and some persons were selected and appointed.
It appears that through the process of selection one candidate had sought a clarification from the Division Bench and the same Division Bench passed the impugned order stating that the District Judge was number justified in calling for fresh applications on 8th October, 2006 and that the selection process should have been companyfined to the candidates who had already submitted their applications pursuant to the Notification dated 30th July, 2004.
This recruitment was challenged before the High Court and the learned Single Judge found that there was interpolations in the various answers of the candidates and in majority of the cases, the candidates who had been selected, marks had been added on and marks have been clandestinely boosted up to make their selection.
Learned companynsel appearing for the petitioners pointed out that in the earlier judgment there was a direction for de numbero selection and, therefore, the District Judge was justified in calling for fresh applications and the subsequent clarification order passed by the Division Bench was number proper.
No order on the application for impleadment.
Delink Special Leave Petition C Nos.17915, 21118, 16914 and 15801/2006 and list separately.
Heard both sides.
A test was held on 29.08.2004 and the result was published in November, 2004.
