Allahabad High Court
Mahima Singh vs U.O.I. Thru. Post Master General ... on 14 December, 2023
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:82084
Court No. - 20
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9486 of 2023
Petitioner :- Mahima Singh
Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. Post Master General Lucknow And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mehdi Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. S. B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Varun Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed challenging order whereby petitioner has not been permitted to participate in the process of verification of documents on the ground that the selected Board name in the application form does not tally with the uploaded certificate of the Board. Further relief for a direction to opposite party to permit petitioner to participate in verification of document to be held on 25.11.2023 has also been sought.
3. It has been submitted that petitioner had applied for direct recruitment on the post of Gramin Dak Sevak for the recruitment year 2023 but inadvertently the name of school of petitioner as well as marks obtained were incorrectly filled in the application form. It has been submitted that due to aforesaid discrepancy, petitioner was not permitted to participate in the document verification. Learned counsel has also submitted that it is human to err and therefore since this discrepancy has occurred due to human error, the same should be permitted to be corrected and petitioner should be permitted to participate in the document verification in view of the fact that she has the original documentation available with her which can be readily verified by opposite parties. He has placed reliance on Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Shaifali Chaudhary versus State of U.P. & Ors. passed in Special Appeal No.466 of 2013.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties however has submitted that the petition itself has been rendered infructuous due to efflux of time since the process of document verification has already ended on 25.11.2023 as admitted by petitioner herself and therefore now at this stage nothing more can be done. It has also been submitted that as per schedule indicated in advertisement, online registration was available from 03.08.2023 till 23.08.2023 whereafter a window for correction was available to applicants from 24.08.2023 till 26.08.2023 but since petitioner did avail himselrf of such a facility, now such a relief cannot be granted.
5. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is admitted between the parties that discrepancy in the uploaded application form and the original document is as a result of human error. However, it is also evident that the time period for correction of applications expired on 26.08.2023, which is almost four months ago. Even as per the petition, date of document verification was 25.11.2023, which also has expired.
6. Evidently petitioner has approached this Court at a very belated stage. Recruitment processes cannot be kept pending for all time to come merely on the ground of correction being sought by applicants.
7. It is needless to observe that in such recruitment processes, thousands of persons if not lakhs apply and such recruitment process cannot be held up merely on account of omission by certain applicants, which they themselves are unable to correct within time frame prescribed. Sympathy in such cases cannot be misplaced to affect rights of other applicants.
8. In the judgment referred to by learned counsel for petitioner, it is evident that petitioner had approached this Court within the time frame prescribed, which is not the case with petitioner due to which the aforesaid judgment would be inapplicable.
9. Learned counsel for petitioner has also placed reliance on judgment rendered by learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Kaushlya Rani versus State of U.P. and others, Writ Petition No. 2672 (S/S) of 2013. However reading of the aforesaid judgment makes it evident that facts and circumstances of the aforesaid judgment are quite different particularly in view of the fact that in the present case, petitioner has approached this court very much after passing of the date of verification of documents on 25th November, 2023. It appears that in the judgment cited by learned counsel for petitioner, there was no such delay.
10. In view of aforesaid in the considered opinion of this Court, the said judgment would be not applicable in the present facts sand circumstances.
11. Considering the aforesaid facts, it is evident that petitioner has approached this Court at a very belated stage that is even after the date of document verification, no relief as prayed for can be granted at this stage.
12. The petition as such being devoid of merits is dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.12.2023
prabhat
