Girija Devi vs State of U.P. and Others

Rakesh Tiwari, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

It appears from the perusal of the paragraphs 5 and 7 of the impugned order that the Petitioner was never selected by the selection committee as she had obtained lesser mark than the selected candidate. It also appears from the aforesaid paragraph that the Petitioner had neither filed any certificate that she is a divorcee nor she has filled up the requisite column in this regard in her application form, which is annexed as Annexure -7 to the writ petition. Paragraphs No. 5 and 7 of the impugned order is reproduced as under:

other language

It is also apparent from the order passed by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad, that he has considered the plea of the Petitioner and also found that neither any certificate regarding the Petitioner to be divorcee has been appended with the form nor she had produced any such certificate.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the form appended alongwith writ petition as Annexure-7 to the writ petition wherein at the bottom it has been mentioned that certificate regarding the Petitioner being a divorcee is being appended.

It appears that the whole of the form has been filled up by the candidate in her own hand writing except column at serial No. 16, which has been left blank. This column at serial No. 16 requires the candidate to fill up by the, to give the name and post of the person, issuing the certificate to the extent that the candidate is divorcee. Had the Petitioner appended aforesaid form, she would have definitely made mention about it in this column at Serial No. 16 and give the date as well as the post and name of the authority issuing certificate.

It appears from the form as well as from Paragraphs 5 and 7 of the aforesaid impugned orders passed by the District Magistrate dated 22.10.2005 that the Petitioner had not appended the certificate in respect of her being a divorcee. No case has been made by the Petitioner showing any illegality or infirmity in the order impugned.

For the reasons stated above no interference is warranted by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.