Yash Srivastava vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 20066 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19437 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Yash Srivastava
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishal Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.N. Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

The present petition has been filed stating that in terms of the stipulation in the advertisement, the offline form was to be submitted by 19.10.2022, however, as the petitioner was suffering from dengue, he could not submit the same within the same time and thus prayed that he may be permitted to submit the hard copy.

To support his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that subsequent to the preliminary examination, the respondents themselves have passed an order in respect of the certain candidates, wherein it was recorded that on account of some error the certain persons are who entitled for reservation were not given the reservation and thus in respect of those candidates orders were passed granting the same benefit. He argues that the main examination is now scheduled to be held on 9th January, 2023 and thus no harm would be caused in permitting the petitioner to appear in the said examination.

He has further placed on record a copy of the notification dated 23rd November, 2022, wherein in respect to the 22 new candidates they were permitted to file application afresh. In the light of the said, he argues that the petitioner should be permitted to file the hard copy of the form and should be permitted to appear in the main examination.

Similar issue was considered by this Court in the case of Shraddha Swaroop and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others, Judgment dated 22.11.2022, whereby placing reliance on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Rajendra Patel Vs. State of U.P. and Another; [2015 (8) ADJ 219 (FB)], the writ petition was dismissed holding that the hard copies have to be submitted prior to the cut off date.

In view of the said, I do not see any reason to take a view different from the one taken in the case of Shraddha Swaroop (Supra) and merely because 22 candidates, whose reservation was wrongly accorded, has been given permission, the petitioner cannot claim parity with them.

The petition lacks merits and is dismissed.

This order has been passed in the presence of Shri Praveen Kumar, Advocate holding brier of Shri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for respondent no. 2.

Order Date :- 6.12.2022

Shafique