Rakesh Kumar And 7 Ors. vs State Of U.P. And 2 Ors.
2017 Latest Caselaw 2543 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 29652 of 2017
 
Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar And 7 Ors.
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudarshan Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ran Vijai Singh,J.

Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.

We have heard Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Archana Singh learened counsel appearing for respondent no.3.

By means of this writ petition prayer has been made to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 to amend the advertisement so that the petitioner may come in the ambit of the eligibility-criteria.

Smt Archana Singh, who appears for the respondent no.3 submit that on the similar issue, another Writ A no.30021 of 2017 has been preferred, in which counter affidavit has been called for.

For the reasons stated in the order passed in Writ A no.30021 of 2017 matter requires scrutiny.

Issue notice.

Notices on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel whereas Smt. Archana Singh, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no.3, therefore, notices need not be served to the aforesaid respondents.

Learned counsel for the respondents are granted six weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed two weeks thereafter.

List thereafter alongwith record of writ petition no.30021 of 2017.

It may be clarified that we have not stayed the selection process and that may go on.

While filing the counter affidavit, learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for the Commission shall bring on record the decision taken by them on the representation of the petitioners.

Order Date :- 19.7.2017/Swati