HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 7724 of 2016 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for respondent(s)-BSA. 2. It is the case of petitioners that they may avail benefit of a recent judgment passed by Supreme Court in The State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Neeraj Kumar Pandey and Others (Special Leave Petition (C) Diary No.18516 of 2019), decided on 29.01.2025, arising out of same recruitment process and for reference, following paragraphs of said judgment are reproduced hereinafter :- "13. In the circumstances as above, we direct the State of Uttar Pradesh to consider the claims of each of the candidates who were the petitioners before the single judge for appointment on posts of Assistant Teachers (Science and Mathematics). Those of the candidates who are found to have secured marks more than the candidate who has been appointed with the least number of marks shall be considered and offered appointment, in accordance with law, with the clear stipulation that such candidate shall not be entitled to seniority as well as arrears of salary. 14. To facilitate compliance of this order, we grant liberty to the successful candidates before the High Court to place before the State a list indicating the marks that such candidates would have been entitled to, had the process not been kept on hold, in terms of the formula that has been adopted for assessing the merit of all the candidates. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Kumar Saroj, Navin Kumar Sharma, Rahul Agarwal, Vinay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rajendra Prasad, Santosh Kumar Sunil Kumar And 20 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 15. Let this exercise be completed as early as possible, but preferably within three months from date and in any case not beyond six months. 16. It is made clear that only those candidates who have approached this Court with writ petitions/interlocutory applications seeking intervention, impleadment, etc. any time before 31st December, 2019 shall be entitled to the benefit of this order. Relief is declined to the others on the ground that they were fence-sitters." 3. Learned counsel for respondent(s)-BSA as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State submit that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and in case a fresh detailed representation is given before the competent authority, the same may be considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the petitioners, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that the petitioners may make fresh detailed representations, ventilating all their grievances, supported by all such documents, as may be advised, before the Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad, U.P., Prayagraj, within three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order. On such representation being made, Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad, U.P., Prayagraj shall make all endeavours to consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, by means of reasoned and speaking order, after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. October 1, 2026 K.N. WRIA No. 7724 of 2016 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad