ORDER

Per Hon’ Devendra Chaudhry, Member (A) The present Original Application (O.A.) has been preferred against the order dated 18.08.2015 passed by the respondent no.4 whereby appointment of the applicant has been cancelled with regard to post of Gram Dak Sewak („ GDS‟ in short hereinafter), Post office Baitikalan, Koiripur, District Sultanpur.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, when the post of GDS BPM Post Office Batikalan (B.O.) Koripur, district Sultanpur, fell vacant, an advertisement for filling it up was issued in August 2014 (Annexure A-2), whereupon the applicant along with 72 others applied. That, the applicant was given appointment vide order dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure A-4) and after verification of documents, the Respondent-4 issued a letter dated 30/05/2015 for training of the applicant from 01/06/2015 to 04/06/2015 (Annexure A-6). However, R-5 made a complaint against the appointment and R-4 as a result of which the training of the applicant was cancelled vide letter dated 03/06/2015 (Annexure A-8). Thereafter vide letter dated 10/06/2015 the engagement of the applicant was kept in abeyance pending inquiry (Annexure A-7). That thereafter vide letter dated 18/08/2015 the engagement issued vide 27/05/2015 itself was cancelled (Annexure A-1).

2.1 It is asserted by the applicant that the complaint on the basis of which her engagement has been cancelled is misleading inasmuch that the complainant R-5 is also a candidate for the examination conducted for the appointment to the same post as the applicant and therefore has a vested interest in the applicant not being selected. In fact, even he is not eligible and he has concealed the fact that he has passed High School twice – once in 1991 from Bahudhandhi High School, Sonahita, Jaunpur and also in 2014 from Kisan IC Ajosi Jaunpur per marksheets at Annexure A-9/10. Further that R-5 is also working as LIC Agent vide code number – 0704521 (Annexure A-12) which is a disqualification for the post which is why every candidate is required to state in Sl-

12 (Annexure A-13) of the application form as to whether he/she is working as LIC Agent. That this fact has been concealed by the complainant while applying for the said post which is evident from the LIC document of R-5 (Annexure A-

12) making him ineligible and in consequence, he is also misleading the respondents with regards to case of the applicant‟s eligibility.

2.2 Accordingly, the applicant has challenged the impugned order on the grounds of (i) that no opportunity of hearing has been given before passing of the order, (ii) the order is arbitrary as the applicant has not violated any condition of securing the employment to the post of GDS aforesaid, (iii) that the applicant fulfills all conditions thereto prescribed and, finally (iv) the complaint is malicious and on false misleading grounds. Ld. counsel for the applicant has also relied on the judgment of Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench and other citations to fortify his case. It is therefore asserted that the impugned order is worthy of being quashed and hence the O.A.

3. Per contra, the respondents deny any wrong doing and assert that the impugned order is lawful on the grounds that (i) the appointment of the applicant has been cancelled as per inquiry after a complaint by one Sri Diwakar Misra, son of Sri Uma Shanker Mishra, R/o Village Kudhuwa Post Thakurganj, Jaunpur whereby it was complained that the applicant has passed High school twice viz. 2005 and 2013 and that this fact has been hidden by the applicant and therefore, the applicant is not eligible for getting selected on the basis of the presented qualification, (ii) that a similar complaint was also made against the applicant by one of the candidates, viz R-5, (iii) That on the basis of various complaints, the respondents apprehending wide scale fraud in the conduct of the basic examination itself, ha