A new twist has come in the matter of recruitment of 69000 assistant teachers in primary schools of Uttar Pradesh. The additional selection list of 6800 candidates issued by the state government recently has been challenged before the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court. The court said that in addition to the 69 thousand vacancies advertised in the year 2018, not a single appointment can be made without advertisement. On January 5, the state government had decided to issue an additional selection list of 6800 candidates, regarding which the matter again reached the court.
Justice Rajan Roy gave this interim order while hearing a petition filed by Bharti Patel and 5 other candidates. The Court prima facie observed that since the Supreme Court has clearly directed that any vacancy above 69000 which was not advertised as on December 1, 2018, should not be allowed to be filled. So under no circumstances can anyone be appointed more than the advertised 69000. The court said that now it is for the state to decide what it has to do in this matter. Because this interesting situation has been created by the state. But one thing is very clear that more than 69000 vacancies not a single appointment can be done. While banning additional appointments, the court has also directed two leading newspapers to publish about the ‘pendency’ of the present case. Because the interest of many people is involved in this.
This is the case, 69000 vacancies of assistant teachers were advertised in the state in 2018. The exam took place in 2019. This matter has gone many times from Allahabad High Court to Supreme Court. This time a petition has been filed before the High Court challenging the additional selection list of 6800 candidates issued by the State Government. In this, the petitioners have called this list against the intention of the law.
The state government gave this argument. On behalf of the state government, Advocate General Raghavendra Singh said before the court that the reason for issuing this additional selection list is that some reserved category candidates had filed a petition before this court, in which Some orders were passed. On the basis of which the state reconsidered the implementation of reservation. Due to non-implementation of the policy as well as the provisions of the Reservation Act, 1994, such reserved category candidates who are otherwise meritorious, i.e. they have scored more than the cutoff marks for the general category, were left out of appointment. The Advocate General further submitted that accordingly the State Government after re-consideration of the matter has decided to issue an additional fresh select list containing the names of 6800 candidates who are reserved category candidates. Who have secured more than cutoff marks for unreserved category. Since this has been done in consequence of orders passed by this Court, this Court at this stage should not interfere in the matter.
On this, the court asked the Advocate General that if 69000 posts have already been filled, then on which posts will these 6800 be appointed? Can two persons work against one post and get salary? The Advocate General could not satisfy the Court in this matter but said that the State has not taken any decision to exclude the already appointed candidates who would have scored less than these 6800 candidates. The counsel appearing for the private respondents also defended the list saying that they should be appointed for general category candidates being meritorious and those appointed earlier should be removed. By giving the said interim order, the court has issued notice to the concerned parties of the case. Along with this, by fixing the next hearing of the case on February 18, the parties have also been given a chance to present their side in the meantime.
“Now, it is for the State to decide what it has to do in this matter because it is the State which has created this situation but one thing is very clear that more than 69000 vacancies cannot be appointed to such posts.
Under no circumstances, more than 69000 vacancies, which were advertised as on 01.12.2018 (ATRE 2019), will be recruited and unadvertised vacancies will not be filled without advertisement and selection.”
What is the whole matter?
The 69000 vacancies of assistant teachers in Uttar Pradesh, which was advertised in 2018, has been at the center of controversies several times. It has gone through several litigations from the Allahabad High Court to the Supreme Court. This time a writ petition has been filed before the Allahabad High Court in Lucknow challenging the additional select list of 6800 candidates released by the state government.
The State Government submitted before the Court that the reason for issuing this additional select list is that some reserved category candidates had filed a petition before this Court, on the basis of which certain orders were passed by this Court, The state has re-looked at the implementation of reservation. Due to non-implementation of the policy as well as the provisions of the Reservation Act, 1994, reserved category candidates who are otherwise meritorious, meaning they have scored more than the cut-off marks for the general category, will not be appointed. left from
The Advocate General further submitted that accordingly, the State Government after re-consideration of the matter has decided to issue an additional fresh select list containing the names of 6800 candidates, who are reserved category persons who have cleared the cut-off for unreserved category. have scored higher marks and since this exercise is a result of orders passed by this Court, therefore, this Court at this stage should not interfere in the matter.
However, the Court questioned the Advocate General that if 69000 posts have already been filled, to what post these 6800 selectors will be appointed, and can two persons work against one post and get salary?
The Advocate General in this matter could not satisfy the High Court but said that the State has not taken any decision to exclude the already appointed candidates who would have scored less than these 6800 candidates. The lawyers representing the private respondents also defended the list saying that they should be appointed for general category candidates being meritorious and those appointed earlier should be removed.
what did the high court say
Justice Rajan Roy prima facie observed that since the Supreme Court has clearly directed that any vacancy above 69000 which was not advertised as on 01.12.2018 (ATRE-2019) should not be allowed to be filled , therefore, under no circumstances, can be appointed in excess of the 69000 advertised.
The Court said that this dire situation has been created by the State and now, it is for the State to decide what it has to do in this matter as it is the State which has created this situation but one thing is very clear that more than 69000 vacancies Not even a single appointment can be made. Staying the additional appointments, the Court has directed to publish in leading newspapers about the pendency of the present case as it involves hit of lot of people and 18 for further hearing. February 2022 date is fixed
Leave a Reply