Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3766 (ALL)

Const. Sandeep Kumar v. State of U. P.

2015-12-02

B.AMIT STHALEKAR

body2015
JUDGMENT B. Amit Sthalekar, J. Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vikram Bahadur Yadav, learned standing counsel for the respondents. 2. Petitioners are seeking a direction to the respondents to allow them to appear in the Physical/racing test for the post of Constable in the U.P. Police Sub-Inspector (Civil Police) Ranker Promotion Departmental Examination. 3. It is not in dispute between the learned counsel for the parties that in the identical matter the Supreme Court in Special Appeal No.25377-25378 of 2014, Qamar hasan Khan and others vs. State of U.P. and others has passed the following order on 10.8.2015: - "that this Court had granted relaxation of age in respect of 110 candidate as one time measure and hence, no further relaxation of age can be granted. When this Court granted relaxation of age by the order dated 9th March,2015, as a one time measure, the present fact situation was not before us. Be that as it may, without dwelling upon it, we direct the State to send 252 candidates for training by granting benefit of relaxation of age. The interlocutory applications for directions are, accordingly, disposed of. In view of our order passed in the interlocutory applications for directions, the special leave petitions stand disposed of. No order as to costs. It is hereby made clear that no court shall entertain any grievance relating to this particular selection. Our present order would not dislodge, if any candidate, who has already been selected or sent for training. Needless to emphasize, the present order has been passed regarding being had to the special features of the case. Contempt Petition (Civil) NO. 331 of 2015 Let the contempt petition be listed on 8th September, 2015, on which date Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State of U.P., shall produce the answer scripts of all the papers to show grant of proportionate marks in accordance of our order." 4. In view of the observations of the Apex Court that no Court shall entertain any grievance relating to this particular selection, this writ petition is dismissed. 5. Similar orders have also been passed by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court in the following cases: - (1) Service Single No.4843 of 2015, Manoj Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P. and others. 5. Similar orders have also been passed by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court in the following cases: - (1) Service Single No.4843 of 2015, Manoj Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P. and others. (2) Service Single No.5039 of 2015, Shiv Singh Yadav and others vs. State of U.P. and others.