69000 शिक्षक भर्ती कटऑफ मामले की सुनवाई में नया मोड़, 60-65% कटऑफ हेतु जारी आदेश की पत्रावली से छेड़छाड़ के संशय के चलते न्यायालय ने मांगा स्पष्टीकरण, आदेश देखें
69000 शिक्षक भर्ती कटऑफ मामले की सुनवाई में नया मोड़, 60-65% कटऑफ हेतु जारी आदेश की पत्रावली से छेड़छाड़ के संशय के चलते न्यायालय ने मांगा स्पष्टीकरण, आदेश देखें
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
This Court on the earlier occasion had said the learned counsel for the State-respondents to produce the relevant record, however, no specific order to that effect was passed. The aforesaid anxiety shown by the Court was for the reason that the Court was willing to know as to how and under which manner the Government Order dated 7.1.2019 has been passed pursuant to the letter dated 5.1.2019 preferred by the Secretary, Board of Basic Education, U.P., Prayagraj.
The argument to that effect has been made by Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Advocate submitting that while issuing the Government Order dated 7.1.2019 the proper procedure was not followed. He has filed supplementary affidavit indicating specifically that for issuing any Government Order there is prescribed procedure under the Rules, under the Act and even under the Constitution and those procedures have not been followed. This was the reason this Court was pleased to say to the learned counsel for the State-respondents to produce the relevant record for perusal of the Court.
Learned counsel for the State-respondent has produced the relevant record today and the same has been perused by this Court. While perusing the relevant original papers Court found that page no. 43 of the original file has been pasted on page no. 42 and there appears some notings after page no. 42, however not readable. It appears that said official noting after page no. 42 has been concealed by fixing one page as page no. 43.
Now the anxiety of the Court is� that as to what is that paper which is after page no. 42 and as to what has been noted on the said paper and as to why this exercise has been done.
Learned counsel for the State-respondents has submitted that there is no tampering or manipulation of any king whatsoever in the original file, therefore, the Court, if it pleases may issue direction for its examination but it would be unnecessarily wasting the time of the Court and would also be delaying the proceedings.
Since the aforesaid exercise of pasting one paper on another paper creates doubt in the mind of the Court, therefore, it would be necessary in the ends of justice that the reason of doing such exercises be explained to the Court.
On the said date it would be clarified by the State-respondents as to why this exercise of affixing one paper on the another paper has been carried out and what is that noting, if anything has been concealed. If the State Government has got that noting, the same shall be produced on the next date with specific explanation to that effect.
This Court shall decide on the next date as to whether the noting on the original file would be seen with the help of experts of forensic agency.
Since page 42 and 43 of the original file are creating suspicion in the mind of the Court as aforesaid, therefore, the original file is being returned to the counsel for the State-respondents but page nos. 42 and 43 of the original file is being retained by this Court under the sealed cover within the safe custody of this Court and a photocopy of page 42 and 43 shall be provided to the counsel for the State-respondents so that the proper explanation could be given on the next date.
Since Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate has concluded his arguments, therefore, on the next date the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the intervenor may address the Court.
List / put up this petition on 20.2.2019 at 10.15 A.M.
Heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
This Court on the earlier occasion had said the learned counsel for the State-respondents to produce the relevant record, however, no specific order to that effect was passed. The aforesaid anxiety shown by the Court was for the reason that the Court was willing to know as to how and under which manner the Government Order dated 7.1.2019 has been passed pursuant to the letter dated 5.1.2019 preferred by the Secretary, Board of Basic Education, U.P., Prayagraj.
The argument to that effect has been made by Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Advocate submitting that while issuing the Government Order dated 7.1.2019 the proper procedure was not followed. He has filed supplementary affidavit indicating specifically that for issuing any Government Order there is prescribed procedure under the Rules, under the Act and even under the Constitution and those procedures have not been followed. This was the reason this Court was pleased to say to the learned counsel for the State-respondents to produce the relevant record for perusal of the Court.
Learned counsel for the State-respondent has produced the relevant record today and the same has been perused by this Court. While perusing the relevant original papers Court found that page no. 43 of the original file has been pasted on page no. 42 and there appears some notings after page no. 42, however not readable. It appears that said official noting after page no. 42 has been concealed by fixing one page as page no. 43.
Now the anxiety of the Court is� that as to what is that paper which is after page no. 42 and as to what has been noted on the said paper and as to why this exercise has been done.
Learned counsel for the State-respondents has submitted that there is no tampering or manipulation of any king whatsoever in the original file, therefore, the Court, if it pleases may issue direction for its examination but it would be unnecessarily wasting the time of the Court and would also be delaying the proceedings.
Since the aforesaid exercise of pasting one paper on another paper creates doubt in the mind of the Court, therefore, it would be necessary in the ends of justice that the reason of doing such exercises be explained to the Court.
On the said date it would be clarified by the State-respondents as to why this exercise of affixing one paper on the another paper has been carried out and what is that noting, if anything has been concealed. If the State Government has got that noting, the same shall be produced on the next date with specific explanation to that effect.
This Court shall decide on the next date as to whether the noting on the original file would be seen with the help of experts of forensic agency.
Since page 42 and 43 of the original file are creating suspicion in the mind of the Court as aforesaid, therefore, the original file is being returned to the counsel for the State-respondents but page nos. 42 and 43 of the original file is being retained by this Court under the sealed cover within the safe custody of this Court and a photocopy of page 42 and 43 shall be provided to the counsel for the State-respondents so that the proper explanation could be given on the next date.
Since Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate has concluded his arguments, therefore, on the next date the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the intervenor may address the Court.
List / put up this petition on 20.2.2019 at 10.15 A.M.
69000 शिक्षक भर्ती कटऑफ मामले की सुनवाई में नया मोड़, 60-65% कटऑफ हेतु जारी आदेश की पत्रावली से छेड़छाड़ के संशय के चलते न्यायालय ने मांगा स्पष्टीकरण, आदेश देखें
Reviewed by sankalp gupta
on
8:48 PM
Rating:
Reviewed by sankalp gupta
on
8:48 PM
Rating: