Allahabad High Court Stays Decision Of UP Govt To Appoint 6800 Additional Assistant Teachers In The State

The Allahabad High Court has stayed the decision of the Uttar Pradesh government to appoint 6800 additional candidates as primary assistant teachers in the state in addition to already appointed 69000 candidates.

The Bench of Justice Rajan Roy made it clear that the Government can't appoint more than 69000 candidates without issuing an advertisement regarding the same, since in the original advertisement issued by the state, only 69000 posts were intended to be filled.

The case in brief

Essentially, in the original advertisement (for the post of assistant teachers) issued in December 2018, 69000 posts were intended to be filed, however, after all the posts were filled up, the Government had come out with an additional list of 6800 candidates. This very decision was challenged in the instant writ petition filed by Bharti Patel And 5 Others. 

Justifying its decision, the state government sought to explain the backdrop against which it came out with the additional list. It was told to the Court that certain reserved category candidates had filed petitions before the High Court in 2020, challenging the appointment made to 69000 posts pursuant to the December 2018 advertisement.

It was the contention of such reserved category candidates that since they had secured marks higher than the cut-off for the general category, therefore, they are entitled to be considered and selected for the unreserved posts.

Therefore, the State revisited the implementation of reservation policy and took a decision to issue a fresh select list containing names of 6800 candidates, and they are those reserved category persons who have secured higher marks than the cut-off for the unreserved category.

The argument of the petitioners

The counsel for the petitioners primarily contended that no appointment could be made in excess of the 69000 vacancies which were advertised initially in December 2018 by the State Government.

It was further argued that the correct course of action is that the writ petition of the reserved category candidates (pending before the Court) should be heard on a priority basis and if the additional 6800 selectees are, in fact, entitled to be appointed, then they be appointed and those who are not entitled among the 69000 candidates must be ousted.

Court's order

At the outset, the Advocate General for the State Could could not explain to the Court as to how if 69000 posts have already been filled up, these 6800 selectees would be appointed, against which post they would be appointed, and whether against one post two persons can work and get a salary.

Further, the Court noted that in the writ plea moved by reserved category candidates challenging the appointment of 69000 posts, the Court had only asked the State to file counter affidavit in the matter and the State was required to explain as to how the reservation policy has been implemented.

However, the Court further observed, instead of doing the same, the State officials issued a select list of 6800 persons in addition to the 69000 appointments already made by them without disengaging or canceling the appointment of 6800 candidates already appointed if they had secured lesser marks.

In this regard, the Court also referred to an Apex Court's order dismissing a writ petition wherein it was the case that vacancies in excess of 69000 which were not advertised on 01.12.2018 should be allowed to be filled up on the basis of the said selection advertised on 01.12.2018. The Court had explicitly observed that posts in excess of those advertised cannot be allowed to be filled up based on the said selection

Against this backdrop, staying the appointment of these 6800 candidates, the Court observed thus:

"Considering the fact that only 69000 posts were advertised, candidates in excess of 69000 cannot be appointed and they already having been appointed, one fails to understand as to what purpose the issuance of select list of 6800 persons, who may otherwise have been entitled to selection and appointment, seeks to achieve in the factual scenario created by the State, as, in no circumstances, persons can be appointed in excess of 69000 which were advertised. Now, it is for the State to decide what it has to do in the matter as it is the State which has created this situation but one thing is very clear that persons beyond 69000 vacancies cannot be appointed against such posts."

Lastly, the Court has now listed the matter for February 18, 2022, when the stand of the 6800 would be taken into account along with the petition already pending which has been filed by the reserved category candidates. 

Case title - Bharti Patel And 5 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. And 9 Others

Click Here To Read/Download Order