Allahabad High Court
Kuldeep Naiyar vs Chiarman, U.P. Police ... on 12 January, 2021
Bench: Yashwant Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 186 of 2021
Petitioner :- Kuldeep Naiyar
Respondent :- Chiarman, U.P. Police Recruitment And Promotion Board And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh,Hari Om Gupta
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
This petition embodies the unending quest of the petitioner to reap the benefits of his selection as a Police Constable pursuant to a recruitment exercise undertaken by the U.P. Police Recruitment and Promotion Board [?Board?] in 2015.
It would be pertinent to briefly advert to the undisputed facts. The petitioner initially was declared as disqualified since according to the respondents he did not fulfil the height requirement as fixed under the head of ?Physical Standards?. Aggrieved by that decision he approached this Court by means of a writ petition which came to be dismissed by a learned Judge of the Court. That decision was subjected to an intra court appeal in which on 11 March 2019, interim directions were issued requiring the respondents to undertake a physical re-examination of the petitioner to ascertain whether he complied with the Physical Standards as stipulated. Pursuant to that order, a Review Medical Board was constituted by the respondents which upon examination opined that the petitioner was duly qualified. The report of the Review Medical Board in essence overruled the opinion of ineligibility as formed initially and on the basis whereof the petitioner was disqualified.
Pursuant to the aforesaid, the Board by an order of 16 September 2019 upheld the claim of the petitioner for appointment in the following terms: -
????????? ???? ?????? ?? ?????????? ???? ????????? ???? ????? 168 ?????????? ??? ???? ?? ????? 168 ?????????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??????????? ?? ??? ??? 386.73(68.33+128.4+190) ??? ??? ???????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ??????? 380.3 ?? ? ???? ?? ?????????? ????? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ??????? 380.3 ?? ???? ??? 386.73 ??????? ???? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?????? (??????) ?? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?????????? ????? ?????? (??????) ?? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ??????? ??? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ?????????, ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?
??? ?????? ???? ?????? -338/2019 ?????? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ???? ???????? 11.3.2019 ?? ??????? ??? ???? ?? ??????????? ?? ?????????? ???????? ???? ???? ?? ??
In view of the aforesaid order, the petitioner appeared before the SSP Varanasi with a prayer for being sent for training. Since the prayer was not acceded to, the petitioner was constrained to address a complaint to the DGP Police, Lucknow. No action for according appointment or for sending him for training was taken by the respondents. In the meantime, the record reveals that the SSP Varanasi invited the petitioner for recordal of his statements pursuant to a communication of 7 November 2020. In the course of that exercise, he was asked to undergo an eye check up again. This too the petitioner completed by appearing before the Divisional District Hospital which has certified that the petitioner has perfect vision. The SSP Varanasi however has continued to stall the taking of further consequential steps. It is in that backdrop that the petitioner assails the validity of the notice dated 9 September 2020 issued by the SSP Varanasi requiring the petitioner to undergo a fresh medical examination.
Having heard learned counsels for parties, the Court finds itself unable to appreciate the stand taken by the SSP Varanasi. It is not disputed before this Court that it is the Board which is the final authority insofar as issues relating to recruitment are concerned. The stand of the Board stands unequivocally recorded in its order of 16 September 2019 referred to above. It is also not the case of the respondents that the aforesaid order has either been recalled or reviewed nor is it contended that the aforesaid order does not hold the field. It is in that backdrop that the Court is constrained to observe that the conduct of the SSP Varanasi clearly appears to be arbitrary and unjust.
The SSP Varanasi cannot be countenanced in law to have any authority or jurisdiction to either sit in judgment over the decision of the Board nor do the relevant statutory rules which govern the recruitment in question empower him to independently evaluate the validity of the selection of a candidate. In the aforesaid background, this Court is of the firm and considered view that peremptory directions are clearly warranted commanding the respondents to give effect to the order of 16 September 2019 passed by the Board and this controversy pertaining to a recruitment exercise undertaken in 2015 lent a quietus.
For the aforesaid reasons, the present writ petition is allowed. The impugned communication of 9 September 2020 is hereby quashed. A writ of mandamus is hereby issued commanding the Chairman of the Board to ensure that all consequential steps as are liable to be taken pursuant to its order of 16 September 2019 are completed with expedition and in any case within a period of 1 month from today.
Order Date :- 12.1.2021
faraz
