Allahabad High Court
Neha Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 4 May, 2022
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Jayant Banerji
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 3
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1005 of 2021
Appellant :- Neha Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Vivek Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,B.P.Singh Kachhwaha
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
1. Heard Shri C.K. Parekh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant and Shri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri B.P. Singh Kachhwaha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. This special appeal has been filed praying to set aside the judgment and order dated 30.07.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No.6522 of 2021 (Neha Singh vs. State of U.P. & 2 Ors.).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant submits that the domicile certificate was got issued by the petitioner-appellant on 30.11.2019 and it was submitted before the authority concerned and, therefore, the benefit of domicile could not have been denied to the petitioner-appellant. He submits that under the circumstances, the cut-off marks applicable to candidates domiciled in Uttar Pradesh should have been applied to the petitioner and not the cut-off marks provided for general candidate of outside the Uttar Pradesh.
4. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that in terms of the advertisement dated 16.11.2018 for direct recruitment, the petitioner-appellant before submitting application form was mandatorily required to obtain domicile certificate and the information relating to domicile certificate was to be filled by him/her in the application form for recruitment on the post of Constable in Civil Police. He further submits that even in the application form, the required information relating to domicile of Uttar Pradesh was necessarily to be filled in the application form. He has drawn our attention to page 113 of the special appeal which contains the copy of the application form submitted by the petitioner-appellant. He, therefore, submits that the special appeal is totally devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.
5. We have carefullyconsidered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties.
6. It is admitted case of the petitioner-appellant that as per condition no.6(ga)(1) of the advertisement dated 16.11.2018, candidates were required to obtain domicile certificate of Uttar Pradesh in the year 2018 itself but before the last date of submission of the application form for recruitment. Perusal of the application form for the aforesaid recruitment shows that it clearly required following information to be filled by a candidate :-
"A(i) Domicile Certificate issuing UP State authority
A(ii) Date of issuing Domicile Certificate (DD/MM/YYYY )
A(iii) Domicile Certificate Serial No."
7. Perusal of the application form of the petitioner shows that the petitioner-appellant did not furnish any of the aforesaid information in her application form. Thus, in terms of the advertisement, the petitioner-appellant was liable to be treated as a female candidate not domiciled in Uttar Pradesh. Consequently, the cut-off marks applicable to non-domiciled candidate was lawfully applied in the case of the petitioner-appellant. Therefore, the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any error of law or fact.
8. The relied judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Alok Kumar Singh & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors. reported in (2018) 18 SCC 242 (paragraphs 6, 7 and 8), as noticed by us in our earlier order dated 03.02.2022, has no application in the facts and circumstances of the present case inasmuch as in that case information forwarded by the candidates were found to be insufficient and, therefore, they were required to obtain fresh certificate which they produced belatedly. That apart, paragraph 8 of the said judgment shows that the direction has been given by the Supreme Court in exercise of powers conferred under Article 142 of the Constitution, making it limited for the parties before it and the petitioner who were before the High Court.
9. For all the reasons aforestated, we do not find any merit in this special appeal. Consequently, the special appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.5.2022
SK
