Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13452 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4327 of 2023 Petitioner :- Charan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Urban Development Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saloni Jaiswal,Rajendra Prasad Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Under challenge is the order dated 10.12.2021, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, whereby the representations filed by the petitioners for their appointment on contractual basis has been rejected. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that after various vacancies on contract basis had been advertised, the petitioners had applied for the same and in terms of the order of District Magistrate, Lalitpur dated 17.08.2016, a copy of which is annexure 6 to the petition, a select list was prepared for various Nagar Palikas / Nagar Panchayats including Nagar Panchayat Pali, Lalitpur in which four vacancies on contract basis were available. The names of the petitioners find place for Nagar Panchayat Pali, Lalitpur against the OBC Category and the Unreserved Category. The copy of the list is annexed as part of annexure 6 to the petition (page 63). 4. Despite their selections, the petitioners were not appointed. Earlier the respondents had taken a plea that on account of an order dated 17.11.2016 passed in Writ Petition No.25403(S/S) of 2016 in Re: Asif Khan vs. State of U.P. and Ors., the petitioners were not liable to be appointed. Subsequent thereto, a Government Order dated 30.12.2016 was also issued in which all appointment on contractual basis were stayed. 5. It is contended that the aforesaid writ petition of Asif Khan (supra) was itself clubbed with another Writ Petition No.21229(S/S) of 2016 which was disposed of and consequently, the impediment of the interim order of the High Court dated 17.11.2016 in the case of Asif Khan (supra) was no longer operative yet the petitioners were not appointed and various persons, who were selected along with the petitioners in various other Nagar Palikas / Nagar Panchayats, were appointed. This constrained the petitioner to file Writ Petition No.6633(S/S) of 2021 in Re: Charan Singh and Anr. vs. State of U.P. and Ors. which was decided vide judgment and order dated 15.03.2021 by which the Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikas, U.P., Lucknow was directed to consider the representation of the petitioner. 6. In pursuance thereof, by means of the order impugned dated 10.12.2021, the representation of the petitioners has been rejected. 7. A perusal of the said order would indicate that primarily two grounds have been taken for rejecting the claim of the petitioners for their appointment which are as under: (a) A Nagar Palika is required to be self sustaining and generate its own resources. It has been indicated that in case the four contractual employees have to be appointed in the Nagar Panchayat Pali, Lalitpur, the same would entail an expenditure of Rupees Nine Lakhs Seventy One Thousand and odd which the Nagar Palika, on account of its precarious financial situation, is unable to bear. (b) As per 2011 census, considering the population of the Nagar Panchayat, Pali, the numbers of employees are required to be 31 but there are 39 employees presently working and as such, the Nagar Palika is over staffed. 8. Considering both the aforesaid grounds (a) and (b), the claim of the petitioners for their appointment has been rejected. 9. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that on the one hand, the respondents have rejected the claim of the petitioner for their appointment and on the other hand, various persons, who had been selected along with petitioners, have been given appointment in various other Nagar Palikas / Nagar Panchayat and this reflects the discriminatory attitude on the part of the respondents. 10. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel has supported the reasons as contained in the order impugned on the basis of averments contained in the counter affidavit also. 11. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record, it emerges that after a selection was held for appointment on a contractual basis for various Nagar Palikas / Nagar Panchayats, the petitioners were found eligible for being appointed on contract basis in Nagar Panchayat Pali, Lalitpur. 12. Initially, on account of an order passed by the writ Court in the case of Asif Khan (supra), the petitioners were not appointed but the said writ petition was disposed of. When the petitioners were not appointed, they were constrained to approach this Court and after the order passed by the writ Court for deciding of the representation of the petitioners, the claim of the petitioners for their appointment has been rejected vide order impugned dated 10.12.2021. Two grounds are contained in the order impugned namely (a) and (b) as mentioned above. 13. Considering the aforesaid two grounds, once the Nagar Palika is required to be self sustaining and the Nagar Palika is found to be in precarious financial position, consequently, no mandamus can be issued by the writ Court to appoint the petitioner on contractual basis even though the situation of the Nagar Palika is not financially sound. 14. The other reason is that the number of employees manning the Nagar Panchayat Pali, Lalitpur is much more than what is required as per the Census 2011. 15. Consequently, once a policy decision has been taken by the respondents to not appoint the petitioners on contractual basis and the reasons are also germane to the issue, as such, no ground for interference with the aforesaid order impugned is made out. 16. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 S. Shivhare Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench