ORDER :

1. This order will dispose of bunch of appeals bearing Special Appeal Nos.1206 of 2019, 98 and 154 of 2020 and 595 of 2022 as the common legal issues are involved.

FACTS OF THE CASE

Special Appeal No. 595 of 2022

2. The writ petitioner/respondent herein, who appeared in person, was a candidate for the post of Village Development Officer (hereinafter referred to as "VDO"). The writ petition was filed by her as her candidature was rejected, after the recommendation made by the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Selection Commission, on the ground that she does not have CCC Certificate from DOEACC/NIELIT. The writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge.

3. To put the record straight, it needs to be mentioned that earlier the petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petition bearing Writ-A No.14181 of 2018 as she was not allowed to participate in the interview. The said writ petition was dismissed on June 27, 2018. However, in Special Appeal No.1165 of 2018 filed by her, she was allowed to participate in the interview and her result was directed to be placed before the Court. The aforesaid appeal was finally disposed of on April 29, 2019. When the mark-sheet of the writ petitioner was placed before the Court, learned counsel for the State submitted that on the basis of marks secured by the writ petitioner in interview, her position in merit list shall be examined and final result shall be communicated to her.

Special Appeal No.1206 of 2019

4. The writ petitioners/respondent Nos.1 to 17 in the present case were Ex-Servicemen and were candidates to the post of VDO. The issue again was with reference to qualification of CCC Certificate. The stand of the State that the same was required only from DOEACC/NIELIT was not accepted and the direction was issued by the learned Single Judge that the candidature of the writ petitioners will not be ignored only on the ground that their CCC Certificates are not issued from DOEACC/NIELIT.

Special Appeal Nos. 98 and 154 of 2020

5. The writ petitions, on identical facts, were disposed of by the learned Single Judge in the same terms as its earlier judgment in Writ Petition No.1782 of 2019 titled as Pramod Kumar and others v. State of U.P. and others against which Special Appeal No.1206 of 2019 is pending.

ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE CASE

6. The controversy in the writ petitions revolves around the qualification required for the post of VDO. It is again limited to CCC Certificate. Firstly, as to whether that qualification is required and secondly as to whether it is required only from DOEACC/NIELIT or some other Institute as well. The learned Single Judge held in favour of the writ petitioners. The State is in appeal.

7. At the time of hearing, when this Court had asked a specific question to the learned counsel for the State as to whether there is any other writ petition/appeal pending in this Court raising the same legal issues, the answer was in negative.

SUBMISSIONS

8. Argument raised by the learned counsel for the State is that the advertisement for the post of VDO was issued vide Advertisement No.3 (Exam)/2016. The same clearly provided the qualifications required for the post, which included CCC Certificate in computer operation. It was provided for in terms of the Government Order issued by the Government on March 27, 2012. As it was approved by the Governor, hence the qualification is required for the post. The aforesaid Government Order was followed by the another Government Order dated July 23, 2013, wherein it was specifically provided that CCC Certificate has to be from the DOAECC. The argument is that none of the respondents in the appeals possesses the said certificate from DOAECC/NIELIT. Hence, they were not eligible and have been wrongly directed to be appointed by learned Single Judge. In support of the argument, reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mukul Kumar Tyagi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2020)4 SCC 86.

9. In response,