Allahabad High Court
Vipin vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 2 February, 2023
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19680 of 2022 Petitioner :- Vipin Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Durvesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Shri Durvesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Amarnath Singh, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.
By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner under the Scheduled Caste Category (SC) as well as to go ahead and follow up the proceeding for appointment of the petitioner on the post of Sub-Inspector (Male/Female) in PAC, Civil Police, Platoon Commander/PAC-2020-21 pursuant to the Advertisement dated 24.02.2021.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 24.02.2021, the petitioner had moved an application and participated in the recruitment process.
It is urged that the petitioner appeared in the written examination and had also cleared the same. It is also urged that the petitioner was successful in the examination as he got 50% marks, but the Board did not release the score card.
It is further urged that the results were declared on 14.04.2022 with category-wise and the cut-off was also declared.
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had secured 279.1363120 which was the minimum cut-off for the Scheduled Castes Candidates. In order to support the aforesaid, the petitioner has filed a document as Annexure No.13 to indicate that the normalised marks of the petitioner is 279.1363120.
It is in this context, the petitioner had urged that though he had obtained minimum cut-off, yet his candidature was not considered.
By means of the order dated 29.11.2022, the learned standing counsel was required to bring on record the written instructions and in furtherance thereof, the written instructions have been brought on record, wherein it has been indicated that the cut-off which was made for the Scheduled Castes Category was 279.1363120 whereas the petitioner secured 265.1619618, which was below the cut-off and, therefore, the petitioner was not selected.
Having considered the aforesaid material including the written instructions which have been brought on record and a copy thereof was also furnished to the petitioner, it could not be disputed regarding the marks which has been obtained by the petitioner. Though the petitioner has attempted to rely upon the Annexure No.13 to urge that the petitioner had obtained the minimum cut off marks, but that is merely a typed piece and its authenticity is unknown except the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that it was downloaded from the website of the Board, however, there is nothing to substantiate the same. Apart from the fact that in accordance with the written instructions where the results as well as the marks obtained by the petitioner has been provided to the Court which indicates that the petitioner did not secure minimum cut off marks.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the clear opinion that since the petitioner could not obtain the minimum cut-off, there can be no error nor any mandamus can be issued directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner.
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.2.2023 Rakesh/-