ORDER :

1. Delay condoned.

2. A process of recruitment of teachers (in the disciplines of Science and Mathematics) initiated by the Competent Authority of the Government of Uttar Pradesh on 11th July, 2013 was abruptly put on hold with immediate effect on the basis of an oral order dated 23rd March, 2017.

3. Such oral order was challenged in sixteen writ petitions before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Vide common judgment and order dated 03rd November, 2017, a learned single judge of the High Court allowed all the writ petitions. It was ordered as follows: -

"For the reasons mentioned above, I find that the oral instructions issued by the State Government for stopping the recruitment process is not justifiable. Accordingly, the order of the Secretary dated 23.3.2017, which is bereft of any reason, is set aside. The Secretary of the Board is directed to complete the process of selection against the remaining vacant posts strictly in terms of earlier respective circulars dated 16.6.2016, 19.9.2016, 15.12.2016 and 30.12.2016, expeditiously, preferably within two months from the date of communication of this order."

4. The State of Uttar Pradesh filed three writ appeals against the said judgment and order and not sixteen appeals. Resultantly, the judgment and order of the single judge on thirteen writ petitions attained finality. However, the three writ appeals (with Special Appeal No. 648/2017 being the lead matter) came to be considered by a Division Bench of the High Court which, vide its judgment and order dated 12th April, 2018 dismissed the same observing as follows: -

"It is more than apparent that there were no good grounds for putting on hold the recruitment process. What is important to note is that when confronted, the Board made a statement in the Court that oral directions had been issued by the State Government for putting on hold the recruitment process and when called upon, the State Government in one of the matters, denied having issued such instructions. Even if it be assumed that the State Government has actually issued oral directions then we have no hesitation in observing that such oral directions could not have been made a ground by the Board to keep in abeyance the recruitment process. Even the communication dated 23 March 2017 sent by the Board does not indicate any reason as to why the recruitment process should be put on hold.

In such circumstances, there is no good reason to interfere with the directions issued by the learned Judge in the impugned judgment. We also expect that the Board will ensure that the recruitment process initiated by the aforesaid Government Orders dated 11 July 2013, 15 December 2016, 16 June 2016 and 19 September 2016 shall be completed as expeditiously not latter than two months from today."

5. The State thereafter applied for review of the aforesaid judgment and order, which was dismissed by the Division Bench by an order dated 25th March, 2019.

6. Following such dismissal, the State has challenged the orders dismissing the writ appeals as well as the review petitions by filing Special Leave Petition (C) D. No.18516/2019 before this Court.

7. It is not in dispute that during the last five years the special leave petition has remained pending on the file of this Court, several appointments have been made on posts of Assistant Teachers (Science and Mathematics) pursuant to the order of the single judge which went unchallenged by the State by not filing writ appeals against the said common judgment and order deciding the remaining thirteen writ petitions.

8. In course of hearing before a coordinate Bench on an earlier occasion, it was the admitted case that although the respondents in the special leave petition had been counseled during the fourth and fifth rounds but were not favoured with appointments, those candidates who were counseled in course of the seventh and eighth rounds had been given appointment.

9. By an order dated 10th November, 2022, this Court called upon the S