Allahabad High Court
Ajay Kumar Yadav And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 1 November, 2019
Author: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16102 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Yadav And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mujib Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Following orders were passed in the matter on 18.10.2019:-
"Submission is that though petitioners have scored marks above the cut off in their respective categories, but their claim has not been considered.
Learned Standing Counsel may obtain instruction in the matter.
Post as fresh on 31.10.2019."
Learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions, according to which, there was an apparent mismatch between the photographs and thumb impression of the petitioner at different stages of recruitment. As per instructions, fresh report has been called for in the matter and thereafter a final decision would be taken.
Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon an order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 3312 of 2019, decided on 18.10.2019. In paragraph 9(iv) of the judgment, dated 18.10.2019, passed in Writ Petition No. 3312 of 2019, following observations have been made:-
"9(iv) Petitioner nos.1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 24, 25, 28, 29, 32, 36, 39, 44, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 59, 62, 65 and 66, who have been non-suited on account of mismatch between their thumb impression on the admitted documents vis-a-vis thumb impression obtained on the date of document verification etc., would be informed of the materials that exist against them in respect of respondents' plea that petitioners have indulged in impersonation. Such intimation would be given to them, within six weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. Petitioners in that regard would have an opportunity to submit their reply annexing materials that they intent to rely upon in support of their claim. The authorities shall get the matter examined and would pass an appropriate order, within a further period of two months, thereafter. While taking such decision, the authorities would keep in mind the observations made by this Court in the case of Ranvijay Singh (supra)."
Since the authorities are yet to take a final decision in the matter, it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction upon the respondents to accord consideration to the petitioner's claim, noticed above, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned order to be passed, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
In the event it is found that there is a mismatch between the petitioner's photographs and thumb impression/signatures, etc. and impersonation is alleged, the authorities shall act in terms of the direction contained in paragraph 9(iv) of the order dated 18.10.2019 passed in Writ Petition No. 3312 of 2019.
Order Date :- 1.11.2019 Ranjeet Sahu