Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:33492 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5840 of 2025 Petitioner :- Nalendra Pandey And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rishi Raj,Vinay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashank Bhasin Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Rishi Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pankaj Patel, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties No. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 & 7, Sri Shashank Bhasin, learned counsel for opposite party No.4. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned advertisement dated 01-05-2025 issued by opposite party no. 7 to the extent it relates to inviting applications for the post of PGT (Post Graduate Teacher) & PRT (Primary Teachers) Teachers in PMS Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition, in the ends of justice. (ii) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the opposite parties not to appoint the post graduate and primary teachers on contract basis in Police Modern School, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, pursuant to the impugned advertisement dated 01-05-2025, in the ends of justice." 3. Attention has been drawn towards the orders being passed by this Court in a writ petition of the present petitioner, which have been enclosed collectively as Annexure-4. 4. Sri Rishi Raj, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the aforesaid writ petitions were decided finally vide orders dated 29.04.2025 & 30.04.2025 giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent authority preferring representation within a period of fifteen days and the competent authority may take appropriate decision within a period of six weeks. Sri Rishi Raj has further submitted that the aforesaid orders have been served upon the authorities alongwith the fresh representations but without disposing of the representations, the impugned advertisement issued on 01.05.2025 by opposite party No.7/ competent authority. The opposite party No. 7/competent authority has not waited even for one day to take any decision but ignoring the aforesaid orders of this Court, the impugned advertisement has been issued. 5. Sri Pankaj Patel has produced the copy of instructions letter dated 24.05.2025 provided by the Commandant, 35 Bn. PAC, Lucknow but in such instructions, it has no where been indicated as to what decision has been taken in compliance of the orders of this Court and without explaining the aforesaid fact the concerning authority tried to defend the advertisement. 6. The instructions letter dated 24.05.2025 is kept on record. 7. Sri Pankaj Patel has however submitted that the aforesaid orders of this Court dated 29.04.2025 and 30.04.2025 served upon the authorities on 17.05.2025 and 20.05.2025, and two petitioners, namely, Nalendra Pandey and Gajendra Kumar Mishra have not preferred their representation till 24.05.2025, when the instructions provided to Sri Patel. 8. Prima facie, it appears that the concerning opposite party is not taking care of the direction of this Court to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law, rather ignoring that direction, impugned advertisement has been issued which is absolutely unwarranted and uncalled for in view of the given facts and circumstances of the issue. 9. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be appropriate that without taking any appropriate decision on the representations of the petitioners in compliance of the orders of this Court dated 29.04.2025 and 30.04.2025, the post in question should not be advertised. 10. Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue, I hereby dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage directing the opposite party No.7/competent authority to take appropriate decision on the representations of the petitioner within a period of fifteen days strictly in accordance with law, in terms of the aforesaid orders of this Court, and if any petitioner has not preferred any representation till date, he may prefer the same within three days so that his representation may be disposed of and the decision may be communicated to the petitioners forthwith. 11. Till any appropriate decision is taken by the competent authority on the representation of the petitioners, the opposite party No.7/competent authority may not proceed further pursuant to the advertisement dated 01.05.2025. 12. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 30.5.2025/Reena (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench