Pinky vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 2397 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 36
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5205 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Pinky
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Vashistha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State-respondents.

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2/Additional Secretary (Recruitment), Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Bard, Lucknow to consider the candidature of the petitioner and issue admit card to the petitioner on behalf of fresh caste certificate for medical examination before the Medical Board and thereafter appoint the petitioner on the post of Constable in pursuance of the Recruitment Examination- 2015 in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for appointment to the post of Constable (Female) pursuant to the recruitment exercise initiated in the year 2015. The petitioner belongs to OBC category and her certificate dated 16.8.2016 had been relied upon. Petitioner has obtained 413.83 marks in the selection which is above the cut off marks in the respective category is 410.60. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has not been selected without assigning any reason. Lastly it is submitted that in this regard she has filed representation on 15.11.2021 before respondent no.2 which remains pending till date.

Learned Standing counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served to keep the writ petition pending and suitable direction may be issued by this Court to the authority concerned for deciding the same in time bound manner.

Prima facie, this Court finds that petitioner has scored marks above the cut off in the respective category and her OBC certificate is also of a date as is made permissible in Full Bench judgment of this Court in Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in (FB) 2017 (5) ADJ 494. In such circumstances, petitioner's claim for appointment was liable to have been considered.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, direction is issued upon respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.2021 by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

With the above direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

Order Date :- 9.5.2022

Akbar