1. By this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent the appellant has questioned the legality and validity of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, dated 26.4.2007 in CWJC No. 13517 of 2000, whereby, the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India came to be dismissed with special cost of Rs. 2000/after being held that the writ petition is utterly frivolous and meritless.

2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. We have also taken into consideration the pleadings, documentary evidence, as well as, text and tenor of the impugned order of the learned Single Judge and the relevant propositions of law including the latest constitutional Bench decision rendered in Secretary of the State of Karnataka & Others vs. Umadevi (3) and Others, (2006)4 SCC 1[: 2006(2) PLJR (SC)363], arising out of the Service Jurisprudence.

3. It is manifest and evident from the record that the appointment of the appellant-original writ petitioner on the post of Class III in the Department of Education is not legal and valid inasmuch as neither he has been appointed by the competent authority nor in the manner prescribed. It appears that the appel