Allahabad High Court
Ruchi Nayak vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 5 November, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:72797-DB
Court No. - 1
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 581 of 2024
Appellant :- Ruchi Nayak
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Appointment Lko. And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi,Ganesh Kumar Gupta
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gaurav Mehrotra,Maria Fatima
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
(I.A. No. 1 of 2024)
1.Heard Sri Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Vikrant Raghuvanshi, the learned Standing Counsel and Ms. Maria Fatima, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2..
2. The intra-court appeal arising out of the judgment/ order rendered by learned Single Judge in Writ A No. 6824 of 2024 is delayed by 29 days.
3. The appeal is accompanied with an application seeking condonation of delay supported by an affidavit.
4. Detailed reasons have been spelt out in the affidavit seeking condonation of delay in filing present appeal.
5. Having regard to the ministerial process and time taken for seeking opinion from the concerned authorities, we are of the view that the application seeking condonation of delay deserves to be allowed.
6. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing appeal is condoned.
7. Let the appeal be assigned a regular number.
(Order on memo of appeal)
8. This intra-court appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 23.08.2024 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge dismissing Writ A No. 6824 of 2024. The aforesaid writ petition was filed seeking a direction to the opposite parties to remeasure the height of the petitioner, either by the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission or through any other independent Government body. The petitioner had applied for selection to the post of Van Daroga. The minimum height for the aforesaid post is 150 cm. In the physical fitness examination conducted on 16.02.2024, height of the petitioner was found tobe 149.50 cm. and, therefore, the petitioner's candidature was rejected. The petitioner claims to have submitted a representation dated 23.02.2024 to the Chairperson of U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission wherein she claimed that her height is actually 150 cm. and it was measured wrongly. She further alleged that she was made to put her signatures on the measurement recorded, by exerting pressure.
9. The writ petition filed on 20.08.2024. The Hon'ble Single Judge recorded submissions of the learned counsel for the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission, who stated, on the basis of instructions received by her, that the petitioner was declared underheight on 16.02.2024, she was informed about this fact and she has put her signatures. The petitioner did not approach the court immediately thereafter.
10. The selection process has been completed, result of the selection was declared on 02.03.2024, documents of the successful candidates have been verified and the final result was about to be published when the writ petition was decided on 23.08.2024. The Hon'ble Single Judge was of the view that as selection process was about to complete, any interference made at this stage my affect the selection process and may open a Pandora box.
11. It is relevant to not that although the petitioner has raised a factual dispute that her height is in fact 150 cm. and it required to be measured, she has not annexed any document e.g. medical certificate, to substantiate this claim. The petitioner's physical test was taken on 16.02.2024, she claims to have submitted a representation on 23.02.2024 and the writ petition was filed on 20.08.2024, i.e. after a substantial delay.
12. It is also relevant to note that the writ petition as well as the present intra-court appeal have been signed and filed by the petitioner's brother and the petitioner herself has not come forward to verify the pleadings made in the writ petition or in the special appeal.
13. In absence of any material to substantiate the claim of the petitioner-appellant that her actual height is 150 cm. and she was wrongly measured as 149.50 cm., we find no ground to interfere in the order passed by the writ court.
14. Special appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.11.2024
Pradeep/-
