Hariom vs State of U.P. and Others

Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 125660 of 2011

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

The short delay of 9 days in filing the present appeal has sufficiently been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay. The application is allowed and the delay is condoned. The appeal be now treated as having been filed within limitation. Office is to give regular number.

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 8th March 2011 passed by the learned single Juddge wherein the writ petition preferred by the Appellant questioning the validity of the order passed by the U.P. Police Selection and Promotion Board, Lucknow rejecting the candidature of the Appellant has been dismissed.

We have heard Sri B.N. Yadav, learned Counsel for the Appellant and the learned standing counsel, who represents the Respondents and have perused the impugned judgment and order dated 08.03.2011 passed by the learned single Judge giving rise to the present appeal, the grounds taken in the memo of appeal and the documents filed along with it.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant invited the attention of the Court to the terms and conditions of recruitment for post of Constables in Uttar Pradesh police as given in the information brochure and submitted that if the clause v and vi of the conditions are read together, the Board has no power to reject the candidature of the Appellant. It has only the power to reject the application form. He submitted that that in the present case, the Appellant has purchased one OMR form from the Cantt. Post Office which by mistake he deposited in the Ghantaghar Post Office and when he came to know about the mistake committed, he purchased another OMR form from the Ghantaghar Post Office and deposited the same there. Thus, at best the 2nd form could have been rejected and not the candidature.

The submission is wholly misconceived.

Conditions v and vi are two separate directions. Condition vi provides that if more than one form is filled up, the form shall stand rejected. Rejection of the application form of the Appellant has resulted in rejection of his candidature.

That being the position, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity.

The appeal fails and is dismissed.