Allahabad High Court
Smt. Neelam Chauhan vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 29 April, 2020
Author: Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
AFR
Judgment Reserved on 06.03.2020
Judgment Delivered on 29.04.2020
In Chamber
1. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 190 of 2020
Petitioner :- Smt. Neelam Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Jatan Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
WITH
2. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 52442 of 2017
Petitioner :- Ram Niwas Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Chandan Agarwal,Sri Vivek Verma
3. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 56234 of 2017
Petitioner :- Smt. Brijesh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadh Narain Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav
4. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 56739 of 2017
Petitioner :- Suryavati And 152 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 24 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare,Shantanu Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Avneesh Tripathi,Awadhesh Kumar,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Chandan Agarwal,Nisheeth Yadav,Pankaj Kumar Singh,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Ram Chandra,Ram Prakash Shukla,Sanjay Kumar Singh,Sanjay Srivastava,Santosh Kumar,Shashi Kant Verma,Shyam Krishna Gupta,Sunil Kumar Singh,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma,Yatindra,Yogendra Singh Bohra
5. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 56881 of 2017
Petitioner :- Hemant Kumar And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Sanjay Kumar Singh,Vivek Verma
6. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 58784 of 2017
Petitioner :- Ravindra Singh And 8 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shrikrishna Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
7. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 58870 of 2017
Petitioner :- Surjeet Singh And 9 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shree Prakash Giri
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Vivek Verma
8. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 58917 of 2017
Petitioner :- Minakshi Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Verma
9. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60007 of 2017
Petitioner :- Sneh Lata Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma
10. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60014 of 2017
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar And 50 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripath
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Vivek Verma,Yogendra Singh Bohra
11. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60023 of 2017
Petitioner :- Neelmani Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nitinjay Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Bilas Yadav,Vivek Verma
12. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60026 of 2017
Petitioner :- Sukhbir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Bilas Yadav,Vivek Verma
13. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60031 of 2017
Petitioner :- Atul Kumar And 3 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma
14. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60044 of 2017
Petitioner :- Pravesh Pratap Singh And 30 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripath
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Ram Chandra,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma,Yogendra Singh Bohra
15. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60188 of 2017
Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Shukla,Shree Prakash Giri
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma,Vivek Verma
16. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60193 of 2017
Petitioner :- Prem Singh And 10 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Shukla,Shree Prakash Giri
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Ram Bilas Yadav,Vivek Verma
17. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60202 of 2017
Petitioner :- Jay Chandra Singh And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Verma
18. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60206 of 2017
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kushmondeya Shahi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Bilas Yadav
19. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60693 of 2017
Petitioner :- Rajnish And 36 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 11 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Himanshu Kumar,Zafar M. Naiyer
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,Mrigraj Singh,Pankaj Kumar Singh,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma
20. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60735 of 2017
Petitioner :- Rakesh And 96 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 17 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare,Rohit Upadhyay,Shantanu Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Nisheeth Yadav,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Sanjay Kumar Singh,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Santosh Kumar,Shashi Kant Verma,Suresh Kumar,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Virendra Chaubey,Vivek Verma
21. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 60748 of 2017
Petitioner :- Hem Singh And 32 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 11 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Chandan Agarwal,Ram Bilas Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma
22. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 61118 of 2017
Petitioner :- Amod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikram D. Chauhan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma
23. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 61270 of 2017
Petitioner :- Yogendra Singh And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Shukla,Shree Prakash Giri
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
24. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62110 of 2017
Petitioner :- Neelam Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar,Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Verma
25. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62133 of 2017
Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manju Rani Chauhan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajesh Khare,Vivek Verma
26. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62278 of 2017
Petitioner :- Lillesh Kumar And 6 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Bilas Yadav,Satya Prakash Singh,Yogendra Singh Bohra
27. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62881 of 2017
Petitioner :- Smt. Krishna Bala
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Janam Shahi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh Kumar,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma
28. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62894 of 2017
Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Singh Sengar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Singh,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma
29. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62902 of 2017
Petitioner :- Himani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jagdish Prasad Mishra,Bindeshwari Prasad Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma
30. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62925 of 2017
Petitioner :- Shalini Pal And 3 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripath
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Ram Bilas Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma
31. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62951 of 2017
Petitioner :- Prem Singh And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Vivek Verma
32. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62979 of 2017
Petitioner :- Ashwani Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Othrs.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma
33. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62982 of 2017
Petitioner :- Geeta And 10 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Othrs.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Shashi Kant Verma,Shyam Krishna Gupta,Suresh Kumar,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma,Yogendra Singh Bohra
34. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62983 of 2017
Petitioner :- Nitesh Kumar And 17 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 14 Othrs.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Mrigraj Singh,Pankaj Kumar Singh,Raghvendra Pratap Singh,Ram Bilas Yadav,Sharwan Kumar,Suresh Kumar,Vikram Bahadur Singh,Vivek Verma,Yogendra Singh Bohra
35. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2306 of 2018
Petitioner :- Neelam Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Singh,Lavkush Kumar Bhatt
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Verma,Vivek Verma
36. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2858 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rupesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Basic Sichha Parisad Govt, Of U.P. Allahabad
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mr Vijay Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mr Vivek Verma
37. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3070 of 2018
Petitioner :- Hemant Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Department Of Basic Education
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mr Siddharth Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- Mr Vivek Verma
38. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4694 of 2018
Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Vivek Verma
39. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4994 of 2018
Petitioner :- Versa Rani And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Othrs.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiva Kant Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
40. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5214 of 2018
Petitioner :- Ram Gopal
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Srivastava,Pankaj Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajesh Khare
41. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5225 of 2018
Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Soni
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A/R0321
42. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5928 of 2018
Petitioner :- Virendra Pratap Mishra And 9 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
43. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6495 of 2018
Petitioner :- Lavlesh Kumar Dewedi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Basic Education Up Lucknow And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Srivastava,Vivek Verma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
44. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6982 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rahul Yadav And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 04 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Himanshu Kumar,Ashutosh Sharma,Sr. Advocate Zafar M. Naiyer
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
45. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7006 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Babu Lal Ram,Navin Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Verma,Yatindra
46. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7421 of 2018
Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar And Another
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik,Ved Prakash Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Suresh Kumar,Vivek Verma
47. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7519 of 2018
Petitioner :- Gulvir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Harish Chandra Pratap,Ram Nath Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Harish Chandra Pratap,Vivek Verma,Yatindra
48. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9028 of 2018
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Onkar Nath
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Vivek Verma
49. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10288 of 2018
Petitioner :- Shiv Kumar And 16 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Satish Chandra Yadav,Vivek Verma,Yatindra
50. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10412 of 2018
Petitioner :- Deepa Katiyar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Singh,Vivek Verma
51. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11446 of 2018
Petitioner :- Manish Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Birendra Kaushik,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,Vivek Verma,A1626
52. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11466 of 2018
Petitioner :- Archana Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Sri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
53. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11488 of 2018
Petitioner :- Kuldeep Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Birendra Kaushik,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Avneesh Tripathi,Vivek Verma
54. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11493 of 2018
Petitioner :- Shishu Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Avneesh Tripathi,Vivek Verma
55. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11597 of 2018
Petitioner :- Awdhesh Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Chandan Agarwal,Vivek Verma
56. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14557 of 2018
Petitioner :- Manju Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., ,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Avneesh Tripathi,Ganga Mehta,M.N. Singh
57. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14640 of 2018
Petitioner :- Seema Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Siddhartha Khare,Sr. Advocate, Shri Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Avneesh Tripathi,M.N. Singh,Vivek Verma
58. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15287 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rajwati And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Vivek Verma
59. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15524 of 2018
Petitioner :- Prem Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishnaji Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Verma
60. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15533 of 2018
Petitioner :- Omveer Singh And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Vivek Verma
61. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16971 of 2018
Petitioner :- Ritu Rani
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Dubey,Mohit Gautam
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Verma,Yogendra Singh Bohra
62. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19414 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sangeeta Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Yadav,Ashok Khare, Sr.Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,Vivek Verma
63. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9952 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Shipra Srivastava
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Nath Singh,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate,S.K. Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
64. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9954 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arpna Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Santosh Kumar
65. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9955 of 2019
Petitioner :- Renu Panwar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Santosh Kumar
66. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9956 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sudhir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Nath Singh,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate,S.K. Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
67. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10001 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shiv Nandan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Santosh Kumar
68. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10007 of 2019
Petitioner :- Santosh Kumari Kanaojia
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Santosh Kumar
69. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10184 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N.Singh
70. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10201 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajnish Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
71. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10203 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pushpa Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N.Singh
72. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10204 of 2019
Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Saraswat
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
73. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10208 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pratibha Saraswat
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
74. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10218 of 2019
Petitioner :- Deepak Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
75. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10284 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Santosh Kumar
76. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10286 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satya Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
77. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10287 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sushlesh Kumari Rawat
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
78. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10291 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
79. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10296 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mamta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
80. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10304 of 2019
Petitioner :- Meena Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
81. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10307 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
82. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10308 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
83. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10309 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sachin Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhola Nath Yadav,Gagan Mehta
84. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10311 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhuvaneshwar Prakash Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
85. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10313 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
86. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10314 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pramila Lodhi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
87. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10315 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chandra Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhola Nath Yadav,Gagan Mehta
88. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10316 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
89. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10367 of 2019
Petitioner :- Babita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Pradeep Singh Sengar
90. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10368 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neelam Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Pradeep Singh Sengar
91. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10443 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ranu Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Sri Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
92. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10449 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prasoon Rathore
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
93. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10466 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vishram Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Sri Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
94. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10520 of 2019
Petitioner :- Reeta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avanish Tripathi,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
95. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10559 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pratibha Pushkar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avanish Tripathi,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
96. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10560 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
97. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10596 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sanjay Singh Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
98. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10721 of 2019
Petitioner :- Surya Bhan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
99. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10735 of 2019
Petitioner :- Lal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
100. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10754 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Kaushik
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
101. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10760 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Manoj Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
102. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10784 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umakant Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
103. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10787 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anek Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
104. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10790 of 2019
Petitioner :- Govind Kumar Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
105. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10792 of 2019
Petitioner :- Subodh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
106. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10877 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rekha Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
107. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10879 of 2019
Petitioner :- Banbari Singh Chahar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
108. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11070 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kushal Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
109. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11076 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satish Chandra Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
110. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11082 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vishanu Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
111. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11092 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yaduvir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
112. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11100 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hariyendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
113. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11128 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Rana
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
114. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11287 of 2019
Petitioner :- Km. Banti
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
115. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11389 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sandeep Raj Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
116. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11391 of 2019
Petitioner :- Priti Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri. Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
117. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11392 of 2019
Petitioner :- Om Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
118. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11396 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prem Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
119. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11399 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mohit Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
120. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11403 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vijendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
121. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11405 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mukul Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
122. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11411 of 2019
Petitioner :- Om Hari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
123. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11414 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mohd. Salman Khan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
124. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11416 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
125. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12454 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mangal Sain
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
126. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12464 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kailash Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
127. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12479 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prerna Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
128. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12494 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satish Kumar Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
129. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12501 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raghvendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
130. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12509 of 2019
Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
131. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12512 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anand Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
132. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12531 of 2019
Petitioner :- Udai Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Dept. Of Basic Education, Lucknow And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
133. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12564 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Parihar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
134. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12655 of 2019
Petitioner :- Niresh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta
135. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12661 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jayvir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
136. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12662 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Chaudhary
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta
137. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12725 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rupendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta
138. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12792 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Mishra,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Chaturvedi
139. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12963 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chandra Pal Singh Mourya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
140. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12965 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kali Charan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Chaturvedi
141. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13002 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mukesh Deshwal And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta
142. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13013 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Shanti Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh,Shyama Charan Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shyam Krishna Gupta
143. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13060 of 2019
Petitioner :- Durg Vijay Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
144. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13099 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Pandey,Rohit Nandan Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Chandan Agarwal,Gagan Mehta
145. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13131 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bijendra Kumar Gautam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh,Yatindra
146. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13343 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Sunita Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yatindra
147. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13619 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
148. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13621 of 2019
Petitioner :- Divya
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
149. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13785 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
150. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13795 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vikash Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
151. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13845 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sarla Kumari
Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
152. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13855 of 2019
Petitioner :- Subhash Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
153. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13857 of 2019
Petitioner :- Suman Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
154. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13859 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
155. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13861 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
156. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13862 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sriniwas Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
157. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13865 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vimlesh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
158. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13899 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhupendra Singh Chhonker
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Yogendra Singh Bohra
159. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13902 of 2019
Petitioner :- Om Prakash Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
160. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13905 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mithlesh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
161. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13906 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajnish Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
162. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13907 of 2019
Petitioner :- Narendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
163. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13909 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunita Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
164. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13910 of 2019
Petitioner :- Reena Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
165. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13911 of 2019
Petitioner :- Amit Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
166. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13913 of 2019
Petitioner :- Km. Neelam Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
167. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13918 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hemlata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
168. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13919 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jugunoo Verma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
169. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13920 of 2019
Petitioner :- Tilak Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
170. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13921 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nandita Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
171. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13922 of 2019
Petitioner :- Narendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
172. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13923 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pusp Lata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
173. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13937 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jugendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
174. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13947 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Hem Lata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
175. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13950 of 2019
Petitioner :- Tejpal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
176. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13957 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ritu Varshney
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
177. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13962 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shailja Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
178. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13968 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
179. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13972 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mohammad Mustaquim Khan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
180. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13983 of 2019
Petitioner :- Archana Sagar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
181. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13986 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
182. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13994 of 2019
Petitioner :- Gaurav Varshney
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
183. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14001 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
184. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14019 of 2019
Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
185. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14024 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kavita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
186. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14042 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shri Krishan Gautam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
187. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14052 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mamta Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Nisheeth Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma
188. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14058 of 2019
Petitioner :- Lillesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
189. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14071 of 2019
Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
190. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14078 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
191. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14097 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
192. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14106 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jati Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
193. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14107 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sushma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
194. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14111 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Priyanka Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajit Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
195. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14119 of 2019
Petitioner :- Daksha Kumari Bharatdwaj
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
196. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14121 of 2019
Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Varshney
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
197. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14125 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
198. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14126 of 2019
Petitioner :- Geeta Rani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
199. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14160 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vimal Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
200. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14164 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
201. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14170 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Sneh Lata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
202. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14178 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sukhvir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
203. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14184 of 2019
Petitioner :- Devendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
204. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14232 of 2019
Petitioner :- Renu Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Nisheeth Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma
205. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14256 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kiran Lata Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Nisheeth Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma
206. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14258 of 2019
Petitioner :- Archana Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Nisheeth Yadav,Shashi Kant Verma
207. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14260 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rekha Lavania
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
208. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14261 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Alpana Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
209. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14264 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhagwan Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
210. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14292 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mamta Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
211. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14295 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
212. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14299 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
213. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14304 of 2019
Petitioner :- Naresh Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
214. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14328 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pooran Chandra Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
215. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14333 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nidhi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
216. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14343 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Maurya
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
217. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14346 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prabha Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
218. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14375 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sarita Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
219. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14377 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhookesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
220. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14380 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neetu Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
221. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14386 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manavata Gautam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
222. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14387 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
223. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14388 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manisha
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
224. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14389 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manvendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
225. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14390 of 2019
Petitioner :- Atar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
226. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14391 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
227. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14392 of 2019
Petitioner :- Khem Chand
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
228. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14394 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manju Rani Gautam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
229. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14412 of 2019
Petitioner :- Karmvir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
230. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14431 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neelam Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
231. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14468 of 2019
Petitioner :- Tinku
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
232. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14473 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
233. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14536 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satish Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
234. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14540 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Poonam Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
235. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14541 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashish Uttam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendu Ojha,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
236. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14690 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mamta Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
237. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14694 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Gaur And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jeet Bahadur Singh,Sarveshwar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
238. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15206 of 2019
Petitioner :- Gyanendra Singh Dubela
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
239. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15214 of 2019
Petitioner :- Surjeet Kumar Maurya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
240. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15228 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ranjeet Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
241. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15242 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chetan Raj Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
242. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15260 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Varshney
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
243. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15264 of 2019
Petitioner :- Alka Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
244. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15267 of 2019
Petitioner :- Disha Varshney
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
245. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15271 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kalpana
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
246. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15327 of 2019
Petitioner :- Divaker Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
247. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15331 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shyam Bihari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
248. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15863 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
249. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16075 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
250. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16081 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
251. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16085 of 2019
Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
252. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16098 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shiv Kant Tiwari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
253. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16114 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
254. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16120 of 2019
Petitioner :- Deepu Singh Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
255. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16122 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
256. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16125 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajeev Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
257. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16134 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
258. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16144 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anant Ram
Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
259. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16152 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
260. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16157 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vijay Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
261. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16227 of 2019
Petitioner :- Poonam Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
262. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16273 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ganesh Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
263. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16278 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ved Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
264. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16282 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sachin Goyal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
265. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16286 of 2019
Petitioner :- Alok Goyal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Satish Chandra Yadav
266. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16290 of 2019
Petitioner :- Surjeet Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
267. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16529 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mukendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
268. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16537 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
269. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16553 of 2019
Petitioner :- Roopendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
270. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16556 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ravish Chandra Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
271. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16568 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kaliyan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
272. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16577 of 2019
Petitioner :- Atul Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
273. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16592 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ranjana Awasthi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
274. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16599 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar And 3 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
275. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16601 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunita Pathak And 18 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
276. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16603 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kamruddin Siddiqui And 15 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
277. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16620 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
278. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16625 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hema Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
279. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16629 of 2019
Petitioner :- Meena Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
280. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16637 of 2019
Petitioner :- Monika Rajput
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
281. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16645 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dharam Veer Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
282. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16655 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Ritu Rani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Irfan Ali,Ajit Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Yogendra Singh Bohra
283. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16659 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Singh
284. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16702 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dhirendra Singh And 14 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
285. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16711 of 2019
Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
286. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16715 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ravi Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
287. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16717 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shishupal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
288. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16723 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
289. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16726 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jitendra Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
290. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16730 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prakash Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
291. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16788 of 2019
Petitioner :- Priyanka Agrawal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
292. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16790 of 2019
Petitioner :- Naresh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
293. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16796 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
294. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16799 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umesh Babu
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
295. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16802 of 2019
Petitioner :- Atul Singh Baduriya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
296. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16805 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shekhar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
297. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16809 of 2019
Petitioner :- Brajesh Kumar And 10 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
298. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16811 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar And 17 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
299. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16836 of 2019
Petitioner :- Archana And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Mr. Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
300. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16841 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rashmi Verma And 4 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
301. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16845 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vandana Srivastav And 3 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Mr. Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
302. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16988 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rekha Rani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi
303. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16995 of 2019
Petitioner :- Priyanka Rani And 3 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
304. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17035 of 2019
Petitioner :- Saurabh Bishnoi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi
305. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17045 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jay Pal Singh Kuntal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi
306. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17067 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunita Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
307. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17070 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sonu Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
308. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17112 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sukhbir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi
309. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17270 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sheetal Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
310. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17401 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neelam Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
311. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17417 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vivek Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
312. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17432 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shiv Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
313. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17442 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
314. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17447 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Prakash Dixit
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
315. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17451 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dhananjay
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
316. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17467 of 2019
Petitioner :- Piyush Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
317. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17468 of 2019
Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
318. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17470 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
319. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17472 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dipti Chaturvedi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
320. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17504 of 2019
Petitioner :- Alok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
321. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17506 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shiv Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
322. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17509 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satya Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
323. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17673 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kunti Rajput
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri. Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shashi Kant Verma
324. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17726 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chandra Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
325. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17743 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Angoori Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Fuzail Ahmad Ansari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
326. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17756 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pramila Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
327. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17757 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sheelendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
328. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17758 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satyavir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta
329. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17767 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kavita Raj
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta
330. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17781 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhavna Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta
331. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17782 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mahendra Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
332. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17893 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Brijesh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Upendra Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav
333. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17981 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shashi Kapoor
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Yadav,Ashok Kumar Singh Bais
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Suresh Kumar
334. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18018 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jay Narayan Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar,Gagan Mehta
335. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18065 of 2019
Petitioner :- Azad Gulshan Bano
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
336. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18066 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh Chandel
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
337. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18071 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yadvendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
338. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18073 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kanchan Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M0059
339. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18090 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
340. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18109 of 2019
Petitioner :- Iqwal Khan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
341. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18541 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anjana
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
342. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18567 of 2019
Petitioner :- Awadhesh Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
343. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18583 of 2019
Petitioner :- Lalita Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri. Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
344. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18585 of 2019
Petitioner :- Atul Bihari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
345. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18587 of 2019
Petitioner :- Tribhuvan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
346. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18603 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anjali Parashar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
347. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18614 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
348. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18641 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
349. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18656 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ritesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
350. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18663 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajesh Bhaskar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
351. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18691 of 2019
Petitioner :- Laxmi Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
352. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18697 of 2019
Petitioner :- Subhash Baboo
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
353. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18871 of 2019
Petitioner :- Namrata Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
354. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18873 of 2019
Petitioner :- Uday Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
355. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18875 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sangeeta Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
356. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19090 of 2019
Petitioner :- Uday Bhan Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
357. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19102 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ravi Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta
358. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19185 of 2019
Petitioner :- Govind Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
359. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19375 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta
360. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19390 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
361. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19657 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nirja Rani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Shukla,Gagan Mehta
362. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19659 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ramendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta
363. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19717 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Lakhan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar,Gagan Mehta
364. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19723 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prashant Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
365. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19724 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinita Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
366. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19732 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
367. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19737 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
368. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19742 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
369. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19748 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vineet Kumar Bharti
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
370. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19749 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Som Veer
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava
371. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19753 of 2019
Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
372. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19766 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
373. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19768 of 2019
Petitioner :- Devendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
374. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19769 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kalpana Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
375. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19810 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
376. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19826 of 2019
Petitioner :- Meena Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
377. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19858 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ravi Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
378. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19859 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vineet Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Sri Radha Kant Ojha (Sr. Advt.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
379. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19863 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Sushila
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
380. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19867 of 2019
Petitioner :- Surendra Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
381. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19868 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vimlesh Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
382. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19871 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satya Vardhan
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
383. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19873 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
384. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19874 of 2019
Petitioner :- Gaurav Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
385. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19875 of 2019
Petitioner :- Munish Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
386. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19878 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vineeta Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
387. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19901 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sarvesh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Awasthi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
388. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19903 of 2019
Petitioner :- Malti Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Awasthi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
389. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19912 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vineet Kumar Singh,Arvind Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Singh
390. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19918 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mona Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
391. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19924 of 2019
Petitioner :- Omveer Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
392. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19928 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
393. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19929 of 2019
Petitioner :- Akhand Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
394. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19931 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mahavir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
395. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19932 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ravendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
396. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19934 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arun Pratap
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
397. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19936 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sanjay Diwakar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
398. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19939 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bandana Baghel
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
399. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19941 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
400. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19955 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vandana
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
401. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19957 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nishan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
402. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19960 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kamla Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
403. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19967 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bipin Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
404. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19977 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,Rakesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
405. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19981 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ranjana Srivastav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
406. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19983 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anoop Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
407. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19984 of 2019
Petitioner :- Brandawan Batham
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
408. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19986 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
409. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19989 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manjesh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
410. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19991 of 2019
Petitioner :- Reena
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
411. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19993 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shesh Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
412. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19994 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ruchi Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
413. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20001 of 2019
Petitioner :- Aldrin
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
414. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20025 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raj Veer Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
415. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20028 of 2019
Petitioner :- Renu Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
416. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20031 of 2019
Petitioner :- Upendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
417. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20034 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hemlata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
418. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20035 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dhavendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
419. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20036 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shail Bala
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
420. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20037 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prem Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
421. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20038 of 2019
Petitioner :- Brajesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
422. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20039 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pushpa Srivastav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
423. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20041 of 2019
Petitioner :- Praveen Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
424. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20042 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ranveer Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
425. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20043 of 2019
Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
426. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20044 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yadvendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
427. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20045 of 2019
Petitioner :- Uday Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
428. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20046 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rekha
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
429. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20047 of 2019
Petitioner :- Saraswati
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
430. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20052 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prem Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
431. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20056 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
432. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20063 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinita Kumari Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
433. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20065 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
434. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20068 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yavnesh Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
435. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20101 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mukesh Babu
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
436. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20103 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mithlesh Kumari Rajpoot
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
437. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20106 of 2019
Petitioner :- Meeta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
438. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20110 of 2019
Petitioner :- Satyendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
439. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20112 of 2019
Petitioner :- Babita Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
440. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20116 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neeraj Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
441. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20117 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinita Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
442. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20119 of 2019
Petitioner :- Renu Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
443. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20120 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhuvneshwar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
444. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20133 of 2019
Petitioner :- Prathma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
445. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20140 of 2019
Petitioner :- Praveen Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
446. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20144 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dinesh Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri. Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
447. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20147 of 2019
Petitioner :- Malti Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
448. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20150 of 2019
Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
449. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20154 of 2019
Petitioner :- Meena
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
450. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20155 of 2019
Petitioner :- Brahm Prakash Dinkar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Shri Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
451. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20165 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hakim Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
452. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20176 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
453. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20181 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sandeep Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
454. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20184 of 2019
Petitioner :- Badam Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shyam Krishna Gupta
455. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20185 of 2019
Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
456. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20186 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mahesh Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
457. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20187 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mangal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
458. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20189 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yogendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
459. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20190 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajesh Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
460. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20191 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
461. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20193 of 2019
Petitioner :- Idarish Khan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
462. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20195 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Suresh Kumar
463. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20198 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vedvati
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
464. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20202 of 2019
Petitioner :- Avanish Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
465. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20206 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sudha Rani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
466. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20207 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
467. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20210 of 2019
Petitioner :- Amit Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
468. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20213 of 2019
Petitioner :- Abha
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
469. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20219 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
470. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20226 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kavita Jadon
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
471. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20228 of 2019
Petitioner :- Samarendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
472. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20230 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neelam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
473. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20231 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manoj Chauhan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
474. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20232 of 2019
Petitioner :- Priyanka Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
475. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20265 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
476. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20276 of 2019
Petitioner :- Priti Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
477. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20285 of 2019
Petitioner :- Saurabh Kushwah
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
478. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20290 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sachin Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
479. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20298 of 2019
Petitioner :- Gyanendra Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
480. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20301 of 2019
Petitioner :- Saroj Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
481. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20306 of 2019
Petitioner :- Netra Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
482. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20307 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vijendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
483. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20308 of 2019
Petitioner :- Amit Upadhyay
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
484. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20311 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bijendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
485. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20312 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shyam Jeevan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
486. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20315 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jay Dayal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
487. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20317 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunita Shakya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
488. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20318 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vimal Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
489. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20319 of 2019
Petitioner :- Suman Lata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
490. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20321 of 2019
Petitioner :- Omprabha
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
491. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20322 of 2019
Petitioner :- Neetu Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
492. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20323 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Sumiran
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
493. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20325 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vir Bahadur
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
494. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20374 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jageshwar Prasad
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
495. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20375 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Mithilesh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
496. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20376 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajvir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
497. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20377 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nitesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
498. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20378 of 2019
Petitioner :- Saroj Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
499. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20379 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mohd. Naved
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
500. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20382 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vimal Kumar Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
501. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20384 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umresh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
502. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20385 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ratan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
503. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20388 of 2019
Petitioner :- Om Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
504. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20390 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shalini Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
505. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20392 of 2019
Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
506. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20393 of 2019
Petitioner :- Geeta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
507. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20394 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Vimla Verma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
508. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20395 of 2019
Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
509. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20397 of 2019
Petitioner :- Nem Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Kumar Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
510. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20399 of 2019
Petitioner :- Salini
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
511. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20405 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anita Shakya
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
512. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20591 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
513. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20593 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Rajan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
514. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20594 of 2019
Petitioner :- Gaurav Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar
515. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20596 of 2019
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
516. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20597 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ashwani Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
517. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20599 of 2019
Petitioner :- Devki Prasad
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
518. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20600 of 2019
Petitioner :- Lakhan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
519. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20603 of 2019
Petitioner :- Suresh Kumar Malani
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
520. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20607 of 2019
Petitioner :- Namrata Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
521. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20610 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mamta Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
522. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20613 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rishi Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
523. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20617 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ajay Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
524. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20703 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sangram Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
525. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20711 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anuradha
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
526. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20715 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Kuntal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Udai Bhan Singh,Avanish Pratap Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
527. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20717 of 2019
Petitioner :- Meera Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
528. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20723 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Sadhna Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
529. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20781 of 2019
Petitioner :- Subhash Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
530. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20784 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hemant Kumar Saraswat
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
531. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20788 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
532. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20826 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vishwambhar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri Ashok Khare (Sr.Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
533. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20831 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Prakash Sisodiya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr.Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
534. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20834 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raj Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shri. Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
535. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20835 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sanju Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr.Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
536. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20838 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Renu Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr.Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
537. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20842 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mahesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sri Ashok Khare (Sr.Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
538. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20902 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kali Charan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
539. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20905 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manju Vidyarthi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Adv.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
540. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20993 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Rajesh Khare
541. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20994 of 2019
Petitioner :- Hradesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Mishra,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
542. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20998 of 2019
Petitioner :- Suman Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Rajesh Khare
543. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21001 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Gopal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Rajesh Khare
544. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21003 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sujeet Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
545. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21008 of 2019
Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar,Man Bahadur Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
546. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21053 of 2019
Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
547. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21151 of 2019
Petitioner :- Richa Jain
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
548. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21154 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Santosh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
549. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21170 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Reeta Gautam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
550. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21172 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Vir Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
551. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21181 of 2019
Petitioner :- Puspendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Onkar Nath
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
552. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21224 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
553. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21238 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Soni
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Rajesh Khare
554. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21247 of 2019
Petitioner :- Lakhmi Chand
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
555. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21251 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mahesh Chandra Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
556. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21256 of 2019
Petitioner :- Priti Rathore
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
557. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21259 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chaudhary Hari Om
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
558. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21261 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anuradha Kulshrestha
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare (Sr. Advocate)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
559. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21267 of 2019
Petitioner :- Manju Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
560. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21273 of 2019
Petitioner :- Sunita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
561. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21279 of 2019
Petitioner :- Saubhgya Kanwar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
562. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21457 of 2019
Petitioner :- Arun Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Shari Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
563. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21526 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raju
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
564. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 76 of 2020
Petitioner :- Ram Prasad Sonker
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
565. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 79 of 2020
Petitioner :- Aditya Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
566. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 82 of 2020
Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Bhartiya
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gagan Mehta
567. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 151 of 2020
Petitioner :- Lalita Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shree Prakash Giri
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
568. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 226 of 2020
Petitioner :- Vivek Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Jatan Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav
569. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 320 of 2020
Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha,Mahima Maurya Kushwaha
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Gagan Mehta
570. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 367 of 2020
Petitioner :- Smt. Bharti Verma
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Gagan Mehta,Mahesh Narain
571. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 377 of 2020
Petitioner :- Girish Kumar Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
572. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 390 of 2020
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Syed Nadeem Ahmad
573. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 457 of 2020
Petitioner :- Satendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Mahesh Narain Singh,Vikram Bahadur Singh
574. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 467 of 2020
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avneesh Tripathi,Gagan Mehta,Mahesh Narain Singh,Vikram Bahadur Singh
575. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 484 of 2020
Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
576. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 485 of 2020
Petitioner :- Vikas Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
577. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 489 of 2020
Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
578. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 507 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sarvesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Mishra,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
579. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 610 of 2020
Petitioner :- Satya Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
580. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 618 of 2020
Petitioner :- Ram Prakash
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
581. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 626 of 2020
Petitioner :- Narendra Pratap
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Mishra,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
582. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 627 of 2020
Petitioner :- Smt. Manju Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
583. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 630 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
584. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 633 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sarvesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
585. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 637 of 2020
Petitioner :- Abhishek Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
586. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 638 of 2020
Petitioner :- Pravendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
587. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 640 of 2020
Petitioner :- Smt. Meera
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
588. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 646 of 2020
Petitioner :- Smt. Sarika
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
589. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 648 of 2020
Petitioner :- Kuldeep Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
590. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 655 of 2020
Petitioner :- Rajesh Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
591. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 894 of 2020
Petitioner :- Narendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Upendra Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
592. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 939 of 2020
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Vikram Bahadur Singh
593. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1593 of 2020
Petitioner :- Hari Mohan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
594. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1691 of 2020
Petitioner :- Shashi Jaiswal And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Misra,Arvind Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
595. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2124 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
596. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2125 of 2020
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
597. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2128 of 2020
Petitioner :- Madhulata Isauliya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare(Sr.Advocate.)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
598. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2177 of 2020
Petitioner :- Neelam Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar Pandey,Gagan Mehta
599. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2340 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
600. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2363 of 2020
Petitioner :- Ram Narayan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
601. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2382 of 2020
Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
602. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2383 of 2020
Petitioner :- Jay Beer Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Mishra,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
603. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2392 of 2020
Petitioner :- Poonam Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta,M.N. Singh
604. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2395 of 2020
Petitioner :- Anjulata
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
605. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2398 of 2020
Petitioner :- Devendra Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
606. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2603 of 2020
Petitioner :- Shiv Pratap Singh Gurjar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijendra Deo Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Shravan Kumar Panday
607. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2706 of 2020
Petitioner :- Ambuj Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gagan Mehta,Raghvendra Pratap Singh
608. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3231 of 2020
Petitioner :- Jogendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Gagan Mehta
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, Sri Shashinandan, Sri H.N. Singh, Sri R.K. Ojha, and Sri V.K. Singh, learned senior advocates along with their assisting counsels, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, Sri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, Sri Siddharth Khare, Sri Rohit Upadhyay, Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, Sri Kailash Nath Singh, Sri Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Sri Vineet Kumar Singh, Sri K.M. Yadav, Sri Upendra Kumar, Sri Ajit Kumar, Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, Sri Man Bahadur Singh, Sri Rajeev Kumar and Sri Ram Jatan Yadav and other learned counsels for the petitioners, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, Sri Bhupendra Kumar Yadav, Sri Raghvendra Pratap Singh, Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, Sri Vikram Bahadur Singh, Sri A.K. Yadav, Sri Yatindra, Sri Raghvendra Pratap Singh, Sri Shyam Krishna Gupta, Sri Pradeep Singh Sengar, Sri Pranesh Dutt Tripathi, Sri Suresh Kumar, Sri B.K. Yadav, Sri Sanjay Chaturvedi and Sri Shravan Kumar Pandey, learned counsels for the District Basic Education Officers and the U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj, Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri J.N. Maurya, CSC I and Sri R.P. Dubey, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the State respondents, and, Sri Ashok Mehta, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Gagan Mehta, Sri M.N. Singh and Sri Avanish Tripathi, learned counsels for the respondent Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, University, Agra. Sri Akhilesh Chandra Misra, Advocate whose name is appearing in several writ petitions as counsel for the respondent University has not appeared.
2. This batch of writ petitions were heard at length on several days. Learned counsels for the petitioners have argued the matter on 12.02.2020, 13.02.2020, 14.02.2020, 18.02.2020, 20.02.2020, 24.02.2020 and 03.03.2020. Arguments on behalf of respondent University were heard on 25.02.2020 and 26.02.2020. Learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of State has also argued on 03.03.2020. In rejoinder submissions were made by learned counsels for the petitioners on 4.03.2020, 05.03.2020 and 06.03.2020. WRIT - A No. - 190 of 2020 and WRIT - A No. - 13785 of 2019 have been treated as leading writ petition in which the respondent University filed counter affidavits and supplementary counter affidavits but no rejoinder affidavits have been filed by the petitioners despite time granted on 10.02.2020 on request of Sri Ashok Khare, Sri H.N. Singh, Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior advocates which fact is noted in the order dated 10.02.2020.
Facts
3. Petitioners in this batch of writ petition are Assistant Teachers. They obtained employment as Assistant Teachers on the basis of alleged B.Ed. Degree - 2005 shown to have been issued by Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra. Subsequently their degree/marksheets were found to be fake or tampered. Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted under the Orders of this Court in Writ Petition No. - 2906 of 2013 (PIL) (Sunil Kumar Vs.Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University And Another). The SIT submitted its report dated 14.08.2017 giving details of fake degrees/marksheets and tampered degrees/marksheet. Thereafter, the District Basic Education Officers issued notices to the petitioners requiring them to show cause as to why their appointments be not cancelled on the ground of their B.Ed. Degrees/marksheets to be fake or tampered. Thereafter the impugned orders cancelling the appointments of the petitioners were passed.
4. Subsequently, the respondent Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra. Also issued notices to all the students having fake B.Ed. Degrees/marksheets and those having tampered degrees/marksheets. These notices dated 28.12.2019 were published on official website of the University as well as in several largely circulated daily news papers, including "Amar Ujala" (Hindi) and "Times of India" (English) on 29.12.2019.
5. The decision of the Executive Council of the respondent - University dated 06.12.2019 for taking action with respect to the fake B.Ed. Degrees/Marksheet - 2005 and tampered B.Ed. Degrees and marksheets - 2005 and the aforesaid notices dated 28.12.2019 published in newspaper on 29.12.2019 and on the official website of the respondent - University, were challenged by 496 persons by filing Writ WRIT - A No. - 468 of 2020 (Tilak Singh And 495 Others Vs. State Of U P And 4 Others) which was dismissed by this Court by order dated 20.1.2020. Relevant portion of the aforesaid order dated 20.01.2020 in the case of Tilak Singh (supra) is reproduced below:-
"6. Upon investigation, the SIT team submitted report in August, 2017 which states that 3517 fake mark sheets and 1053 tampered mark sheets were distributed and these mark sheets have been adjusted in the tabulation chart. The SIT categorized the candidates in two list. One list of those candidates whose mark sheets are fake and the second list of those candidates whose marks sheet have been tampered. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, SIT by letter dated 11.07.2019 forwarded the aforesaid two list alongwith photo copy of tabulation chart to the University. He further requested the University by the said letter to verify the list of candidates from its record, and after identifying the candidates possessing fake and tampered degrees, it should proceed to cancel all such degrees as per procedure provided in the U.P. State Universities Act,1973 (hereinafter referred as 'Act, 1973'). The aforesaid letter was followed by the letter of Additional Chief Secretary dated 25.11.2019 addressed to the Vice Chancellor of the University making similar request to him.
7. Thereafter, the Executive Council of the University held an emergent meeting on 06.12.2019 and after considering the letter of the State Government dated 25.11.2019 took a decision to verify the list of fake/tampered candidates received from the Special Investigation Team and to invite objection against the same. The relevant extract of decision of the Executive Council is extracted hereinbelow:-
"mDr ijh{kk lfefr fnukad 06-08-2016 ds fu.kZ; dh laiqf"V dk;Z ifj"kn cSBd 28-08-2017 esa gks pqdh gSA fu.kZ;% vij eq[; lfpo] jktLo ,oa csfld f'k{kk m0 iz0 'kklu ds i= la[;k& 583@ ALUBRLS dw @19 fnukad 25-11-2019 dks ifj"kn ds le{k i dk;Z ifj"kn }kjk lE;d ,oa xgu fopkj fd;k x;kA ifj"kn ds ekuuh; lnL;x.k us tkuuk pkgk fd ,l0vkbZ0Vh0tkap esa dkSu dkSu lh Js.kh cukdj dk;Zokgh fd;s tkus dh vis{kk dh x;hA dqylfpo }kjk voxr djk;k x;k fd ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 tkap fjiksVZ esa Fake ,oa Tampered dh nks lwph cuk;h x;hA ekuuh; lnL; Mk0 lqds'k ;kno th us tkuuk pkgk fd vkoafVr lhVksa ds lkis{k vf/kd la[;k vFkkZr 100 lhVksd ij tks 135 izos'k@ijh{kk djk;h x;h gS ml lEcU/k esa ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 dh tkap vk[;k crk;h tk;sA dqy lfpo us ek0 lnL; dks voxr djk;k fd tkap rRdkyhu vf/kdkjh Jh iqrku flag ,oa orZeku esa ,0,l0ih0 ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 Jherh ve`rk feJk }kjk crk;k x;k fd ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 us fo'ofo|ky; }kjk 85 lhVsa ,oa egkfo|ky; }kjk 50 lhVksa dks tksMrs gq;s dqy 135 leLr Nk=@Nk=kvksa ds vadrkfydk] mikf/k lEcU/kh pkVZ dh tkap dh x;h gSA bl izdkj izcU/kdh; dksVs esa izosf'kr Nk=ksa dks lfEefyr fd;k x;kA dqylfpo }kjk ifj"kn dks crk;k x;k fd vfxze dk;Zokgh ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 eq[;ky; y[kuÃ... ls tkudkjh ,oa ewy vfHkys[k ysdj dh tk;sxhA ppkZ ds nkSjku ek0 lnL; izks0 lat; pkS/kjh }kjk /kkjk& 49 ¼,½ ,oa 67 ls rFkk lEcfU/kr ifjfu;e dh tkudkjh pkgh x;hA dqylfpo us ifj"kn dsk lEcfU/kr izko/kkuksa ls voxr djk;k x;k fd%& परिनियम-13-03 "Before taking any action under Section 67 for the withdrawal of any degree, diploma or certificate conferred or granted by the University, the person concerned shall be given and opportunity to explain the charge against him. The charge framed against shall be communicated by the Registrar by registered post and the person concerned shall be required to submit his explanation within a period of not less than fifteen days of the receipt of the charges".
ds vUrxZr fMxzh] fMIyksek okfil ysus ds igys jftLVMZ Mkd }kjk 15 fnu lwpuk ds lkFk lEcfU?kr ls Li"Vhdj.k ekxk tk;sxkA lHkh lEcfU/kr Nk=@Nk=kvksa ds irk ----------rks fo'ofo|ky; vkSj uo ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 ds ikl miyC/k gS bl leL;k ds lek/kku gsrq lnL;x.kksa us lq>ko fn;k fd ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 ls izkIr MkVk dks fo'ofo|ky; dh csclkbM ij viyksM djk;k tk;sA ifj"kn us ;g Hkh fu.kZ; fy;k fd ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 ls lEcfU/kr lwpuk ih0Mh0,Q0 izk:i esa izkIr dh tk;sA ftlls vfxze dk;Zokgh lqpk: :i ls lapkfyr gks ldsA blds fy;s ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 ls vfoyEc vuqjks/k fd;k tk;s A rnksijkUr nSfud lekpkj i=ksa es bl vk'k; dk lekpkj Hkh izdkf'kr djk;k tk;sA bl izLrko ij lnL;x.kksa us Fake ,oa Tampered dh lwph dks lkoZtfud fd;s tkus ij lgefr iznku dhA bl izdkj lEcfU/kr O;fDr ls izkIr Li"Vhdj.k ds vk/kkj ij fu;ekuqlkj fof/kd dk;Zokgh dh tk;s rFkk le;≤ ij ijh{kk lfefr fo'ofo|ky; lHkk rFkk dk;Z& ifj"kn dks voxr djk;s tkus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;kA d`r dk;Zokgh ls lEcfU/kr foHkkx ,oa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; dks vko';d :i ls lwfpr fd;k tk;sA c& dk;Zifj"kn }kjk fo'ofo|ky; vuqnku vk;ksx] fo'ofo|ky; vkSj egkfo|ky;ksa esa f'k{kdkas vkSj vU; 'kSf{kd deZpkfj;ksa dh fu;qfDr gsrq U;wure vgZrk rFkk mPprj f'k{kk es ekudks ds j[k j[kko gsrq vU; mik; lEcU/kh fofu;e 2018 ds lEcU/k es mRrj izns'k 'kklu mPp f'k{kk vuqHkkx&1 ds i= la[;k& 890@lRrj&1&2019&16 ¼114½ @2010 fnukad 16 vxLr&2019 dks dk;Zifj"kn ds vuqeksnu dh izR;k'kk esa dqyifr vkns'k fnukad 21-11-2019 ds vUrxZr Mk0 Hkhe jko vEcsMdj fo'ofo|ky;] vkxjk dh ifjfu;ekoyh dh /kkjk& 21-14 ij iz[;kfir fd;s tkus ls voxr djkukA fu.kZ; dk;Z ifj"kn mDr en ls voxr gqbZA ifj"kn us dqyifr d`r dk;Zokgh dks vuqeksnu iznku fd;kA"
8. Pursuant to the decision of the Executive Council, the University proceeded to publish the notice in newspaper whereby all the candidates, who had passed the B.Ed. examination during the academic session 2004-05, have been intimated that three list namely list of fake candidates, list of tampered candidates and list of candidates appearing in the examination on the basis of roll number allotted to more than one candidate has been published on the official website of the University requiring such individual candidate to submit reply online as also offline by registered or speed post within a period of 15 days failing which exparte proceedings would be taken.
9. The Vice Chancellor on 28.12.2019 passed an order to upload the list of fake candidates, list of tampered candidates and list of candidates appearing in the examination on the basis of roll number allotted to more than one candidate for uploading on the official website of the University. Thereafter, a detailed public notice has been released on the official website of the University on 29.12.2019 and University proceeded to publish three separate list namely; list of fake candidates, list of tampered candidates and list of candidates as candidates from among more than one candidate, who have appeared in the examination with the same roll number alongwith said notice and questionnaire. The said notice alongwith questionnaire issued by the University is extracted hereinbelow:-
",rn~}kjk loZ lk/kkj.k ,oa lEcfU/kr dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;kfpdk la[;k 2006@2013 lquhy dqekj cuke Mk0 Hkhejko vkacsMdj fo'ofo|ky; vkxjk esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] bYkkgkckn }kjk ikfjr vkns'kksa ds vuqikyu esa ch0 ,M0 l+= 2004&2005 ds izdj.kksa esa tkapksijkUr ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 eq[;ky; mRrj izns'k y[kuÅ esa eq0v0la0 02@2015 /kkjk 409@420@467@468@471@204@201 lifBr 120 ch Hkk0n0fo0 o 13 ¼1½ Mh ¼2½ ¼3½ Hkz0fu0 vf/kfu;e cuke gjh'k dlkuk vkfn iathd`r fd;k x;k gSA mDr eq0 v0 la0 es izpfyr foospuk ds dze es ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 }kjk lEcfU/kr Nk=ksa dh rhu lwfp;kW& Qsad] VsEiMZ o ,d gh vuqdzekad ij ijh{kk nsus okys ,d ls vf/kd Nk=ksa dh lwph iszf"kr djrs gq;s fo'ofo|ky; ls vko';d dk;Zokgh djus dh vis{kk dh xbZ gSA bl fo"k; esa fo'ofo|ky; dh dk;Z&ifj"kn dh cSBd fnukad 06-12-2019 esa fy;s x;s fu.kZ; ds vuqlkj ,l0vkbZ0Vh0 ls izkIr rhuksa Js.kh ds Nk=ksa es ls Qsad (Fake) o VsEiMZ 'kS{kf.kd izek.k i=ksa o ,d gh vuqdzekad ij ijh{kk nsus okys ,d ls vf/kd Nk=ksa dk fooj.k fo'ofo|ky; dh vf/kd`r osclkbM www./dbrau. Org.in ij izlkfjr gSA ¼v½ Qsad Nk=ksa dh lwphA ¼c½ VsEiMZ Nk+=ksa dh lwphA ¼l½ ,d gh jksy uEcj ij ijh{kk nsus okys ,d ls vf/kd Nk=ksa dh lwphA Qsad (Fake) ,oa VSEiMZ Nk=ksa ,oa ,d gh vuqdzekad ij ijh{kk nsus okys ,d ls vf/kd Nk=ksa dh lwph esa ukfer Nk=ksa dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd os bl lwpuk ds izdk'ku dh frfFk ls 15 fnol ds vUnj dqylfpo] Mk0 Hkhejko vakcsMdj fo'ofo|ky;] vkxjk dks vkWu ykbZu ,oa iathd`r@LihM iksLV }kjk gkMZ dkih izsf"kr djrs gq;s viuk i{k ,oa vkifRr;ka izLrqr djsa ftlls muds izdj.kksa esa vxzsrj fof/k lEer dk;Zokgh dh tk ldsA vU;Fkk dh fLFkfr esa mijksDr vafdr izdj.kksa esa fo'ofo|ky; dks ,d i{kh; dk;Zokgh djus gsrq ck/; gksuk iMsxkA VSEiMZ mikf/ki=ksa@vadi=ksa okys Nk=ksa dh lwph ij fof/kd dk;Zokgh i`Fkd ls izpfyr dh tk;sxhA mDr dk;Zokgh ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] bykgkckn }kjk ;kfpdk la[;k 2906@2013 lquhy dqekj cuke Mk0 Hkhejko vkacsMdj fo'ofo|ky; vkxjk ds fu.kZ;k/khu gksxhA MkW0 Hkhejko vkacsMdj fo'ofo|ky;] vkxjk ¼iwoZorhZ vkxjk fo'ofo|ky;] vkxjk½ ch- ,M- o"kZ 2005 ¼,l0 vkbZ0 Vh0 tkap ls lEcaf/kr½ izos'k@ijh{kk lEcaf/kr fooj.k uksV%& ,l0 vkbZ0 Vh0 tkap ls lEcaf/kr fuEu lwpuk;s fo'ofo|ky; osclkbV www.dbrau.org.in ij viyksM dj 'kh"kZd& ch0 ,M0 eq[; ijh{kk 2005 lEcU/kh izR;kosnu lhYM fyQkQs eas dsoy iathd`r@LihM iksLV ds dqylfpo] MkW- Hkhejko vkacsMdj fo'ofo|ky;] vkxjk dks izsf"kr djsA 1 Nk=@Nk=k dk uke 2 Nk=@Nk=k dk LFkkbZ@i=O;ogkj dk irk] eks0 uEcj ,oa vk/kkj dkMZ uEcjA 3 Nk=@ Nk=k ds firk dk ukeA 4 izos'k ijh{kk dk vuqdzekadA 5 ftl egkfo|ky; esa izos'k fy;k mldk uke 6 izos'k dkmfUlfyax vFkok izcU/kdh; dksVs esa gqvk ¼Li"V mYys[k djsa½ 7 DkamfUlfyax la[;k@izcU/kdh; dksVs esa izos'k lwph esa LFkku ¼dkmfUlfyax i= layXu djsAa½ 8 egkfo|ky; eas izos'k ds le; izos'k 'kqYd Mªk¶V@udn tek djkus dk fooj.kA Mk¶V@jlhn la[;k-------------@/kujkf'k-----------fnukad ¼izek.k lfgr½ 9 egkfo|ky; esa LdkWyjf'ki izkIr dh n'kk esa fooj.kA Mk¶V@jlhn la[;k-------------@/kujkf'k-----------fnukad ¼izek.k lfgr½ 10 Ukekadu la[;k (Enrollment No.) 11 eq[; ijh{kk ch0 ,M0 05 dk vuqdzekad 12 ch0 ,M0 o"kZ 2005 eq[; ijh{kk ds ijh{kk dsUnz dk uke 13 ch0 ,M0 o"kZ 2005 ijh{kk esa cSBus dk izos'k i= dh Nk;k izfrA 14 ch0 ,M0 o"kZ 2005 dh ijh{kk es lfEefyr gksus ds ckn vadrkfydk Lo;a izekf.kr dj layXu djsaA 15 ;fn vLFkkbZ izek.k i= fo'ofo|ky; }kjk fuxZr fd;k x;k gks rks izek.k i=ksa dh la[;k&leLr vLFkkbZ izek.k i=ksa dh Nk;k izfr layXu djsaA 16 ewy mikf/k dk fooj.k dzekad la[;k 17 vU; dksbZ fooj.k@lwpuk uksV&mijksDr ls lEcfU/kr lHkh vfHkys[kksa dh Loizekf.kr izfr;[email protected] vfuok;Z :i ls layXu djsA layXuksa dh la[;k vadks eas ---------------------------¼'kCnks esa½----------------
lEcfU/kr egkfo|ky; ds izkpk;Z }kjk vxzlkj.k& izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS fd Jh@Jherh@dqekjh ------------------iq=@iq=h ------------------------fuoklh --------------------------us egkfo|ky; esa o"kZ 2004&05 dkamlfyax esutessUV--------------------ds vUrxZr fof/k lEer izosf'kr Nk=@Nk=k Fks@FkhA Jh ------------------------dks tks vadrkfydk fo'ofo|ky; }kjk tkjh dh x;h Fkh mlds ---------vad izkIr gq;s gks rFkk lS)kfUrd esa -----------------Js.kh rFkk izk;ksfxd esa ----------------------Js.kh FkkA छात्र/छात्रा के हस्ताक्षर----------------- प्राचार्य दिनांक ----------------- हस्ताक्षर एवं मुहर"
10. The hard copy of the questionnaire is to bear the signature of the candidate and also the seal and signature of the Principal of the College. The aforesaid public notice calling upon the petitioners to submit information as required in the questionnaire are impugned in the present petition.
11. Challenging the aforesaid notices, learned Senior Counsel has made following submissions;
(i) The decision of the Executive Counsel in its meeting dated 06.12.2019 to verify and identify the fake and tampered marks sheet of B.Ed. for the academic session 2004-05 is not an independent decision of the Executive Council rather the said exercise is being undertaken on the dictate of the letter of Additional Chief Secretary dated 25.11.2019 as well as letter of Deputy Inspector General of Police dated 11.07.2019
(ii) The investigation report of SIT has not yet been accepted either by this Court or by any other Court, and the said report cannot be treated to be a substantial and conclusive piece of evidence to arrive at a conclusion that marks sheet/degree obtained by the petitioners are fake or tampered. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the judgement of Apex Court in the case of M.C. Mehta (Taj Corridor Scam) Vs. Union of India and Others 2007(1) SCC 10 & judgement of Kerala High Court at Ernakulam in the case of Major Basil John Vs. State of Kerala and Others Crl. M.C. No.1877 of 2015 decided on 22.06.2017.
(iii) Controversy regarding the validity of marks sheet obtained by the petitioners is already concluded by the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition no.399 (MB) of 2007 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Vs. State of U.P. and Others) as this Court has validated the admission of petitioners and directed for declaration of result. Hence, the aforesaid exercise undertaken by the University to verify the marks sheet in order to find out the fake and tampered marks sheet is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
(iv) As per Section 67 of the Act, 1973, the Court may by a two-third majority of the members present and voting withdraw from any person any degree, or certificate conferred or granted by the University. In the present case, the decision to cancel the degree has not been taken by the Court but by the Executive Council, who is not competent to initiate such process as the Court and Executive Council are two different authorities under the Act, 1973. Thus, the verification exercise undertaken by the Executive Council is without jurisdiction. He further submits that statute 13.03 of the First Statutes of the Agra University provides the procedure and the manner which is to be followed before taking decision to cancel the degree, but the notices impugned are in complete violation of statute 13.03 inasmuch as the said notice does not communicate the charge against the petitioners so as to enable them to submit their explanation.
13. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the record.
20. At this juncture, it would be relevant to refer the chain of events in which the present exercise to verify and cancel the fake, fabricated and tampered marks sheet and degrees have been undertaken. This Court while considering the Writ C No.2906 of 2013 (Sushil Kumar Vs. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University and Another) found that the original cross list produced pertaining to B.Ed. examination 2005 does not bear signature of any of the authority concerned. The first order passed in the writ petition is extracted hereinbelow:-
"Vice-Chancellor of the University should file his personal affidavit after inspection of original records in respect of B.Ed. examination 2005, by the next date.
Original cross list has been produced today pertaining to B.Ed. Examination 2005 before this Court. It is surprising that none of the pages of the register bear any signature of any officer. Such register appears to be, prima facie, a manufactured document. It is stated that cross list are required to be signed by duly authorized persons and it is only then that the cross list can be accepted as genuine. It is also stated that all cross list of other examinations are duly signed by the officers of the University.
List on 12.03.2013.
The cross list produced today is returned to the counsel for the University."
21. In the said writ petition, the Vice Chancellor had filed an affidavit contending therein that though, the First Information Report has been lodged with the police with regard to fake mark-sheets issued to the students but no investigation had taken place. In the aforesaid backdrop, the Court directed the State to be impleaded as a party by order dated 05.08.2013. On the direction of this Court, a preliminary investigation was carried out. The preliminary investigation report revealed the shocking state of affairs in the University. Consequently, this Court on 14.03.2014 issued a direction to the Secretary, Home, U.P. Lucknow, to assign the investigation to a Special Investigation Agency of the State other than C.B, C.I.D. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, a special investigation team was constituted by the orders of Deputy Director General of Police dated 06.05.2014. Subsequently, this Court on 09.09.2015 after noticing the previous orders directed the Registrar General to place the said matter before Hon'ble The Chief Justice requesting him that the writ petition be treated and dealt with as a Public Interest Ligation by the appropriate Bench.
24. The first contention of Sri Khare that exercise undertaken by the Executive Council is not an independent exercise but has been done at the behest of the State Government is misconceived inasmuch as the University had full knowledge about the fact that the large scale fraud has been committed in issuing the fake and tampered marks sheet of B.Ed. Examination-2005, which fact is also fortified from the personal affidavit of the Vice Chancellor of the University filed before this Court wherein he has made a categorical averment that as many as 6 FIR had been lodged to investigate the allegation of issuance of fake and tampered mark-sheets to the students in collusion with the University employee but no investigation was done by the Police and a request was made to the Court through the said affidavit to handover the investigation to any independent agency. In the aforesaid backdrop, this Court passed an order for constituting SIT to carryout the investigation.
25. The exercise of verification of fake as well as tampered degree should have been undertaken by the University voluntarily instead of waiting for any direction from the Court or authority more so when it was aware of the fact that the fake and tampered mark-sheets have been issued to the students in connivance with the employees of the University. Thus, to say that the verification exercise undertaken by the University is on the dictate of the State Government is not correct and misconceived. In this view of the fact, the first submission of the petitioner is not sustainable.
26. As far as the second contention of Sri Khare that report of SIT is not a conclusive piece of evidence and that cannot be considered and relied upon to hold that degree/marks sheet of the candidates mentioned in the list of candidates of fake marks sheet or tampered marks sheet also lacks substance for the reason that the respondents have not yet cancelled the marks sheet/degree of the candidates categorized in the three list; the list of candidates of fake mark-sheet, list of candidates of tampered mark-sheets and list of candidates appearing in the examination on the basis of roll number allotted to more than one candidate, rather the authority has issued a notice inviting details from each candidate in the form of questionnaire so as to verify the fact as to whether name of a candidate in the list of fake or tampered marks sheet has been correctly shown in the list submitted by the SIT. Had the authorities treated the report of SIT to be a conclusive piece of evidence, there was no occasion for the respondents to publish the notice impugned in the writ petition and asking the candidates to furnish information sought in the questionnaire. Further, the two letters dated 11.07.2019 & 25.11.2019 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, SIT & Additional Chief Secretary also directs the University to follow the procedure as provided in the Act, 1973 for cancellation of a degree. Thus, this Court does not find any merit in the second submission of the counsel for the petitioner.
28. As regards the third submission of Sri Khare that the controversy as regards the validity of admission and issuance of the mark-sheets of the petitioners have already been concluded by this Court in Writ Petition no.399 (MB) of 2007 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Vs. State of U.P. and Others) and other writ petitions, this Court without adverting upon the merits of the contention advanced by the learned Senior Counsel finds it appropriate that the petitioners may raise the said contention before the authority concerned as each individual candidate has to demonstrate that his case is covered by the said judgement and this Court has validated his admission.
30. Now, coming to the fourth contention of Sri Khare, it is relevant to mention that the Court is vested with the power under Section 67 of the Act, 1973 to cancel the degree/marks sheet. The Court under Act, 1973 is to exercise such power only in cases where the University finds that the marks sheet or degree has been issued by the University though, it has been tampered. The procedure contemplated under the Act, 1973 cannot be said to be applicable to cancel those degrees which according to the University have not been issued by it and have been procured by the candidates from outside with which the University has no concern.
31. In the case in hand, the Executive Council has undertaken the exercise to verify and sort out list of candidates whose degree or marks sheet are fake and list of candidates whose marks sheet are tampered and list of candidates who have appeared with the roll number allotted to many other candidates. The Court as defined in the Act, 1973 is not empowered to carryout any such exercise, and it is only Executive Council who has power to undertake such exercise. Therefore, the last submission of Sri Khare is also devoid of merit.
32. It has also been urged by Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel that questionnaire issued by the respondents requires certain information which may not be available with the petitioners and further the said questionnaire requires that it shall bear the seal and signature of principal of the College which is wholly impossible inasmuch as the principal of the concerned college has refused to sign the form and petitioners are helpless to supply information as sought through the questionnaire.
33. A perusal of the questionnaire reveals that it has not sought any information which cannot be said to be available with the petitioners. The information sought through the aforesaid questionnaire are essential to find out and segregate fake and tampered marks sheet/degree. Thus, in the opinion of the Court, the said contention also does not stand to its merit.
34. This Court while exercising power under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot shut its eyes about the entire chain of events which had led to unearth scam of such a magnitude where fake marks sheet have been procured by the candidates with impunity and on the basis of such fake or tampered marks sheet, they have obtained employment as Assistant Teacher.
36. However, this Court cannot also loose sight of the fact that petitioners have obtained employment on the basis of marks sheet alleged to have been issued to them and have been working for more than a decade. Further, there may be cases where Principal of the concerned college may refuse to put signature on the questionnaire and the petitioners cannot force the Principal of the concerned college to put signature and seal on the questionnaire and petitioners may be rendered remedy less. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fairplay, this Court is of the opinion that University while carrying out the exercise to verify the mark-sheet/degree should follow the following observation of the Court:-
(i) The University while verifying the mark-sheet/degree of a candidate may not refuse to consider the questionnaire of a candidate if the same does not bear the signature & seal of the Principal of the college.
(ii) In case after verification, the University disowns the degree of a candidate being fake, the University is not required to follow the procedure contemplated under the Act, 1973 for cancellation of degree/marks sheet. However, it is desirable in the interest of justice and fairplay that the University in such cases should pass reasoned and speaking order giving the basis on which it has formed opinion that degree is fake and has not been issued by the University.
(iii). In case University finds that the degree/marks sheet have been issued by it though tampered, in such an event, the University is expected to follow the procedure provided in the Act, 1973 and give a show cause notice to such candidate and thereafter, pass appropriate orders.
6. The respondent University took decision dated 07.02.2020 declaring 2,823 students to be fake students who managed to procure fake B.Ed. degrees. The matter of remaining 814 students are under consideration of the University who have submitted their representations either with complete or incomplete information. A copy of the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, University, Agra has been filed alongwith a supplementary counter affidavit dated 10.02.2020 in Writ A No.190 of 2020. No rejoinder affidavit to it has been filed. Aforesaid order of the University, despite being in the knowledge of the petitioners; has not been challenged by any of the petitioners either by filing a separate writ petition or by seeking amendment in this batch of writ petitions.
7. The list of 2823 students declared fake by the University by order dated 07.02.2020 has been made part of the order which is scanned and pasted as Appendix I to this judgement.
8. In this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the orders passed by District Basic Education Officers cancelling the appointments of the petitioners or holding the appointments to be void ab initio on the ground that these were obtained on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees or on the basis of tampered B.Ed. Marksheets. None of the petitioners have challenged the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the respondent University declaring 2,823 persons to be fake students. None of the petitioners have filed any amendment application to amend the pleadings and / or to challenge the aforesaid order of the respondent - University dated 07.02.2020.
Submissions on behalf of the Petitioners
9. Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ-A No.19981 of 2019 submitted that he is arguing for the petitioners whose B.Ed. Degrees/Marksheet-2005 are alleged to be tampered or has been declared fake. He submits as under:-
(i) Marks sheet issued to petitioners bears the note that the marks register shall be final in case there is discrepancy between the marks sheet issued and marks register of the University. Therefore, the marks register (tabulation chart) is final.
(ii) The University has proceeded merely on the basis of report of SIT and declared 2823 students as fake merely because these students could not submit reply. Therefore, the order of University dated 07.02.2020 to declare the petitioners as fake, is wholly unjustified.
(iii) No notice was issued by the University to students before declaring them as fake by order dated 07.02.2020.
(iv) University has merely presumed that since the name of the petitioners are not mentioned in the mark register and, therefore, such students are fake.
(v) Mark register or tabulation register is a final paper. Therefore, the University should have first determined whether petitioners' name appears in the marks register and if it does not appear, only then matter can be further inquired, to find out whether there is any manipulation.
(vi) As per paragraph nos. 2 and 3 of the order of the University dated 07.02.2020 filed as Annexure-SA-I in Writ-A No. 190 of 2020, order is yet to be passed with respect to 814 students who are allegedly fake students and who submitted their reply. Therefore, it was not justified for the University to declare 2823 students as fake, who could not submit reply.
(vii) If affiliated colleges have admitted students and the University allowed them to appear in the examination, then such students are not fake.
(viii) Query by the Court
(a) At this point this Court specifically pointed to the learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged B.Ed. Marksheet, 2005 filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition does not bear even enrollment number. Neither copy of enrollment card nor any papers have been filed alongwith writ petition to show that the petitioner was enrolled as students of the respondent - University for B.Ed.,2005 Course.
On being pointed out, learned counsel for the petitioner clearly admitted that copies of papers which are available with the petitioner, have been filed with the writ petition.
(ix). In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner referred paragraph 4 of the writ petition in which it has clearly been stated that he appeared from B.S.A. College, Mathura, which is affiliated to Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra as regular student and in support thereof, merely mark sheet has been filed as Annexure-1 to this writ petition.
(x). University has not yet taken decision in respect of tampered mark sheets. Therefore, unless University declares the mark register and mark sheet as tampered, cancellation of appointment of petitioner as Assistant Teacher, is arbitrary and illegal.
10. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel has argued on behalf of the petitioners in Writ-A 13785 of 2019 as the leading writ petition. He has argued for the petitioners, who are allegedly fake students and also on behalf of other petitioners whose mark sheets have been found to be tampered. He submitted as under:-
(i) As per SIT report, 12,472 students are entered in the tabulation chart and result of 8,930 students were declared and thus merely on this basis, the SIT presumed in paragraph no. 6 of its report that the differences between two, on verification, is 3517 who are fake students, and they have not been students of any affiliated colleges. This finding in the SIT report is in the teeth of the Division Bench judgment dated 06.04.2007 in Writ Petition No. 399 (MB) of 2017 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Versus State of U.P. and others) and other connected writ petitions. In the said judgment, Division Bench directed for declaration of result of 85 students by the University 50 students admitted by colleges under management quota, which shall not be taken to be breach of condition of recognition of N.C.T.E. in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
(ii) The SIT report accepts the position that the name of all the students, who are said to have tampered mark sheets, exists in the tabulation chart of the University which was produced before the High Court in PIL No. 2906 of 2013 (Sunil Kumar Vs. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra and another) and copy thereof was given to Special Investigation Team (SIT). Therefore, name of the students appearing in the tabulation Chart/Marks register are genuine students and their mark sheets cannot be held to be tampered.
(iii) The university has declared 2823 students as fake and SIT has also held these students as fake merely on the ground that they were admitted beyond the strength sanctioned by the N.C.T.E. The basis so taken is in the teeth of the Division Bench judgment dated 06.04.2007 in the case of Pooran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (Supra) in which Division Bench directed for declaration of result of 85 students admitted by counseling by the University and 50 students directly admitted by colleges.
(iv) The basis of holding fake or tampered by the SIT is mark foil of 8899 students recovered by it from the University Campus as mentioned in paragraph no.3 of SIT report. This cannot be made basis to hold the students fake or to hold mark sheets tampered.
(v) Since all the petitioners are regular and permanent teaching staff, therefore, without initiating regular disciplinary proceeding, they cannot be dismissed from the service.
(vi). By the impugned order dated 08.08.2019 the petitioners have been dismissed from service merely on the basis of report of the SIT and chart provided by it and without initiating disciplinary proceeding under U.P. Basic Educational Staff Rules,1973 and U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999.
(vii) Query by the Court
(a) Whether the petitioners have filed copies of B.Ed. admit cards, receipt of deposit of fee or certificate and other evidences as asked by the District Basic Educational Officer ?
(b) Whether the petitioners have filed copies of their admit card, copy of the enrollment card, copy of the receipt of deposit of fee etc. as proof of their being students of the University for B.Ed. Course, 2005 either before the District Basic Education Officer or alongwith this writ petition ?.
(c) Learned counsel for the petitioners could not submit any reply.
(viii). The University has not undertaken any exercise pursuant to the order of this Court in the case of Tilak Singh and 495 others Versus State of U.P. and others) in Writ-A No. 468 of 2020 decided on 21.01.2020 before passing the order dated 07.02.2020 which has been filed as Annexure SA-1 in Writ-A No. 190 of 2020. The order of the University dated 07.02.2020 declaring 2823 students as fake is merely based on the SIT report and the SIT report is based merely on presumption that students in excess of sanctioned strength admitted by the University and the colleges for B.Ed. Course, 2005 are fake, while the Division Bench in Civil Writ No. 399 (MB) of 2017 ( Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Versus State of U.P. and others) decided on 04.07.2007 has directed to issue mark sheet to such students. Thus order of the University dated 07.02.2020 is not valid. The aforesaid Division Bench judgment has become final and yet it has not been noticed by the SIT.
(ix). The SIT report has no evidenciary value. It is merely an investigation report, which has not been approved by any Court. It continues to be an opinion of the SIT. It is not a substantive piece of evidence. Petitioners have not yet been communicated about fake degree. Name of the petitioners find mention in the tabulation chart of the University which has not been held to be fake or manipulated. Therefore, there is no basis to declare the B.Ed Degree 2005 as fake, even if, the petitioners/candidates have not submitted any reply before the University pursuant to the notice dated 28.12.2019.
(x). As per provision of Section 16 of the State Universities Act and Statute 13.03 of the First Statutes of the University, the matter could have been considered only by the Court or the University and not by Executing Council. Therefore, the order dated 07.02.2020 is not a valid order.
(xi). Present writ petition cannot be dismissed merely on the basis of the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the respondents-University declaring 2823 students as fake. An opportunity should be provided to the petitioners to challenge it.
11. Sri Seemant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ -A No.12792 of 2019 making it as his leading writ petition. He submitted as under:-
(i) The argument of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel is adopted.
(ii) There was no tampering in the mark sheet.
(iii) The entire case has been set up on the basis of SIT report. The SIT has left the fact that marks of several candidates were lowered in the tabulation chart. University should abide by the tabulation chart and not by the counter foils which were recovered by the SIT from the University Campus.
(iv) So long as marks secured by the petitioners are mentioned in the tabulation register, there cannot be any allegation of tampering.
12. Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 19903 of 2019 as his leading writ petition. He submitted as under:-
(i) Fake would be those students who have never appeared. The case of the University is that students were admitted beyond the sanctioned strength. Such excess students have been declared to be fake, which is not permissible.
(ii) Whether it is a case of fake students or tampered mark sheet, no action can be taken by the respondent-University, inasmuch as on the basis of their B.Ed, 2005 Degree, petitioners did Special B.T.C. Course after due verification of the degree.
(iii) Some students might have been fake but the order dated 07.02.2020 has been passed by the respondent-University in generality declaring 2823 students as fake, which is not permissible.
(iv) The SIT could not reach on any conclusion about tampered mark sheets. There was no tampering. The apprehension of SIT is baseless.
13. Sri Krishan Ji Khare, learned counsel has argued in Civil Misc.Writ Petition No. 15524 of 2018 treating it as leading writ petition. He states that he is arguing for petitioners whose appointments have been cancelled on the ground of fake degree. He submitted as under:-
(i) The petitioner appeared for admission test for B.Ed. Course 2004-05 and after counseling, he went to take admission in Long Shri Devi Maha Vidyalaya, Nagla, District Hathras, but the said Degree College had not given admission and the University assured that their B.Ed examination shall be taken. For main examination of B.Ed, an admit card was issued by the University to the petitioner allotting Roll No.5148083 which was allotted to some other student also and therefore, the Centre In-charge of P.C. Bangla College, Hathras allotted roll number to the petitioner as 518083A but when the result of the petitioner was withheld, then he contacted the B.Ed Department of the University where an employee has issued him mark sheet and gave new Roll No.5148084. Thus the petitioner is a genuine student.
(ii) Query by the Court
(a) In the alleged attendance letter, the Centre is shown as Long Shri Devi Maha Vidyalaya, Nagla, District Hathras which does not bear even signature of Centre Superintendent and in which the roll number is shown as 5148083A while as per own case set up by the petitioner in his alleged reply dated 06.01.2020, his Centre as P.C. Bangla College, Hathras where the Centre Superintendent/Incharge has made his Roll No as 5148083A. Further as per own case of the petitioner, in his reply dated 06.01.2020 that he had not attended the classes in any college of the University and the mark sheet was issued by some employee of B.Ed Department allotting new roll number. How these facts may indicate that petitioner is not a fake student or his degree is not fake ?
(b). Learned counsel for the petitioner could not reply to this query.
14. Sri Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18614 of 2019 treating it as leading writ petition. He submitted as under:-
(i) He adopts argument of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel.
(ii) The name of the petitioner neither appeared in the list of fake students nor in the list of tampered mark sheet but the services of the petitioner has been terminated illegally merely on the basis of SIT report in which his roll number is 522108, College Code No. 148 Shanti Niketan Degree College Tehra, District Agra is shown as fake. He submitted that detail reply alongwith all relevant papers submitted by the petitioner were not at all considered by the District Basic Education Officer, Firozabad nor these papers were held to be fake or manipulated. Therefore, the impugned order cancelling appointment of the petitioner and declaring it to be null and void, is arbitrary and illegal.
15. Sri Syed Irfan Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ Petition No. 14097 of 2019. He submitted as under:-
(i) Marks shown in the mark sheet of the petitioner is lower than the marks shown in the tabulation chart and therefore, his mark sheet cannot be said to be tampered. The report of SIT observing B.Ed. Mark Sheet, 2005 of the petitioner to be tampered, is baseless.
(ii). In the impugned order dated 13.08.2019 the District Basic Education Officer has not considered properly the explanation submitted by the petitioner.
16. Sri Naveen Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ Petition No. 62979 of 2017. He adopted the argument of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel.
17. Sri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2858 of 2018 and submitted that in the mark sheet of petitioner's B.Ed., 2005, the marks are lower than tabulation chart, hence it is not a case of tampering of marks sheet but the petitioner has been dismissed from service on the ground that his marks sheet is tampered, which is merely based on the report of the SIT.
18. Sri Dinesh Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ Petition No. 60007 of 2017. He submitted that only flaw is that in the mark sheet, the name of father of petitioner is not mentioned which was a clerical error. The name of the petitioner is neither in the list of fake student nor in the list of tampered mark sheet. Therefore, the impugned order dismissing the petitioner from service is not sustainable.
19. Sri Satendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ Petition No. 467 of 2020, Writ Petition No. 377 of 2020, Writ No. 367 of 2020 and Writ Petition No. 939 of 2020. He adopted the argument of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate. With respect of Writ Petition No. 939 of 2020 he submitted that the petitioner's B.Ed degree is of the year 2003-04 Batch and therefore, it could not be declared as fake on the basis of report of the SIT.
20. Smt. Mahima Maurya Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ Petition No. 320 of 2020. She submitted that the petitioner has never been student of Dr. Bheem Rao Ambedkar University, Agra. He has done B.A and B.Ed. from Calcutta University. She has further submitted that the petitioner has never submitted B.Ed Degree 2005 of Dr. Bheem Rao Ambedkar University, Agra to obtain employment as Assistant Teacher. She has submitted reply, but it was not considered by the District Basic Education Officer while passing the impugned order.
21. Sri Sandeep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ Petition No. 1593 of 2020 and adopted the argument of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel.
22. Sri J.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued in Writ A No. 2706 of 2020 that by order dated 24.02.2020 he was required to submit his reply.
23. Sri Brijendra Deo Mishra, learned counsel has argued in Writ -A No. 2603 of 2020 and adopted arguments of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel.
24. Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel in Writ-A No. 15260 of 2019 has argued for the petitioners. He submitted as under:-
(i) The appointment of the petitioners have been cancelled on the ground that their B.Ed. Degree is fake, whereas mark sheet of the petitioners bears enrollment number and roll number. Thus once the University has allotted enrollment number to the petitioners, they cannot be said to be fake students. Burden is upon the University to show as to how the petitioners are fake students, which the University has failed to discharge.
(ii) Ratio of admission for B.Ed. Course, 2005 between the students to be admitted through University and management quota was 85:15. But the colleges admitted 50% students under Management quota which was approved by the Division Bench in Civil Writ No. 399 (MB) of 2017 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Versus State of U.P. and others) decided on 06.04.2007. This 85% students obtained admission through University and 50% students obtained admission under Management quota. Thus there were excess admission by 35%. These 35 students have been alleged to be fake who are not fake, as their admission is protected by Division Bench judgment in the case of Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (Supra).
(iii) The University instead of exercising its authority, pressurized the colleges to get these 35 % students admitted in their colleges. It made nodal centres in colleges and allowed the excess admitted students to appear in examination allegedly without permission of the N.C.T.E. Hence these students are neither fake students nor their mark sheet can be termed as fake. The observations made by the Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment with regard to the admission of these excess 35% students, have been conveniently ignored by the SIT in its report and held these 35% excess students to be fake, which is wholly illegal.
(iv) Copy of the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the University has been filed along with Supplementary counter affidavit in Writ-A No. 190 of 2020. Even if, students have not responded, yet the University was bound to record reason for declaring them fake, but respondent-University has passed the order dated 07.02.2020, in breach of the principle of natural justice. Petitioners attempted to submit reply prior to the order dated 07.02.2020, but the University has refused it. Therefore, the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the respondent-University is faulty order. Reliance is placed upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.N. Mukherjee Vs. Union of India (1990) 4 SCC 594 (Para 35, 36 and 40).
(v) Since no decision has been taken by the University regarding tampered mark sheet, therefore, no submission is required to be made at this stage as University is yet to take decision.
25. Sri Radha Kant Ojha, learned Senior Counsel argued in Writ-A No. 484 of 2020. He submitted as under:-
(i) Argument of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel and Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel are adopted.
(ii) The University has not declared its tabulation chart to be fake or manipulated. Therefore, the students whose names are appearing in the tabulation chart cannot be held to be fake.
(iii) As per note-I appended to the mark sheet, the marks entered by the University in the marks register (tabulation Chart) shall be final and in case of any discrepancy between these two entries, the entries of tabulation chart shall be final. Therefore, order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the University to declare 2823 students as fake is arbitrarily and illegal.
(iv) The report of the SIT is based on unauthentic paper i.e. Mark foils, which are said to have been found by the SIT in the Campus of the University.
(v) Tabulation chart is a public document. Therefore, if the University is placing reliance on it, it cannot be said that it is incorrect unless the University holds it to be incorrect or manipulated in totality. Reference is made to paragraph nos. 2 and 3 of the SIT report filed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13785 of 2019.
(vi) For declaring the students as fake, the respondents-University should have first declared tabulation chart in totality to be incorrect or manipulated and only then respondent-University could declare the students as fake students. If the University declares its tabulation chart to be partly manipulated or incorrect, then it has to give specific reason, which has not been done.
(vii) No submissions are being made for tampered mark sheets inasmuch as the matter is pending before the University.
(viii) Tabulation chart is primary evidence and B.Ed. degree are secondary evidence. Once tabulation chart is correct, the degree cannot be said to be forged. University is treating students as fake or non existing, which is not correct. As per para 13.03 and 13.04 of the Statutes of the University and Section 67 of the State Universities Act, the University can withdraw degree on certain grounds, which are not existing in the present set of facts.
(ix) The show cause notice dated 28.12.2019 published by the University in the newspaper and also on the official website, does not contain any reason and does not cover the ground of Section 67 of the State University Act. No specific charge against the petitioners has been levelled.
26. In support of his submissions, Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel has relied upon judgment reported in Roop Singh Negi Vs. Punjab Nation Bank 2009 (2) SCC 570 (para 10, 11, 12 and 13) regarding recording of evidence collected by the Investigating Officer, Subodh Kumar Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and others 2001(10) SCC 282 (para 6 and 9) regarding fake appointment, Union of India Vs. Ashok Kumar Verma 2017 (9) ADJ 680 (para 10,11, 36 to 39) regarding employment obtained on the basis of fake experience certificate and L.I.C. Of India Vs. Ram Pal Singh Bisen 2010 (4) SCC 491 (para 26,27,31) on the principles that the admission of documents does not prove its contents, which has to be proved by the primary and secondary evidence.
Submission on behalf of the State-Respondents.
27. Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri J.N. Maurya, C.S.C.-I submitted as under:-
(i) SIT was constituted under the order of this Court in PIL.
(ii) Appointment of petitioners have been cancelled in accordance with law. They lacked basic educational qualification. Their B.Ed. Degrees have been found to be fake or tampered. Therefore, their appointments have been lawfully cancelled after affording opportunity of hearing. Disciplinary proceeding as per U.P. Basic Educational Staff Rules,1973 and U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 is not required to be initiated.
(iii) Reliance is being placed on judgment dated 05.12.2019 of this Court in Writ-A No. 18163 of 2019 (Reena Devi Versus State of U.P. and others) and judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Bihar Vs. Kirti Narayan Prasad 2019 (1) ESC-3 (SC), Punjab Urban Planning Authority Vs. Karamjeet Singh AIR 2019 SCC 1913, Union of India and others Vs. Raghuwar Pal Singh 2018 (15) SCC 463, Nidhi Kayam and another Vs. State of M.P. and others, 2017 (4) SCC 1, Bank of India and others Versus Avish D. Mandi Vikar and others 2005 (7) SCC 690, R. Vishwanath Pillai Vs. State of Kerla 2004 (2) SCC 105 and judgment of Patna High Court in Rita Mishra Vs. Director of Primary Education, Bihar AIR 1998 (Patna) 26.
(iv) None of the petitioners have challenged either report of the SIT or decision of the University dated 07.02.2020 declaring the B.Ed. Degree, 2005 as fake. Under the circumstances, the arguments of the petitioners against the order dated 07.02.2020 or against the SIT report, cannot be even entertained.
Submission on behalf of respondent-Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra.
28. Sri Ashok Mehta, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Gagan Mehta has referred the orders dated 23.01.2014, 14.03.2014, 20.08.2014, 15.04.2014 and 09.09.2015 in Writ-C No.2906 of 2013 (subsequently converted in PIL by order dated 09.09.2015) as well as various paragraphs of the SIT report, Division Bench order dated 06.04.2007 in Writ No. 399 (MB) of 2007 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College) and various paragraph of the counter and supplementary counter affidavit filed in Writ-A No. 13785 of 2019 and Writ-A No. 190 of 2020 and submitted as under:-..
(i) There were 84 colleges affiliated with Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra. Two colleges namely Jai Murti College, Firozabad and Kehri Nal Gautam Smarak Mahavidalaya Nagla Saruwa, Agra were not permitted for B.Ed. Course by the N.C.T.E. and therefore, B.Ed Course was not conducted in these two colleges. Thus in total 82 Degree Colleges, B.Ed. Course was conducted in the academic Session 2004-05. However, mark sheets were also managed by 147 persons each in the name of the aforesaid two colleges for B.Ed. Course, 2005. Out of the aforesaid 84 colleges, 25 colleges were Private unaided colleges having permission for B.Ed. Course.
(ii) The admission through University and under Management quota was in the ratio of 85:15 but all the twenty five private un-aided professional institutes/colleges asserted to admit 50% students under management quota. Thus private un-aided professional institutes/colleges, the admission through University was 85% and the college admitted 50% under Management quota and thus total admission was 135 which was excess by the 35. After adjusting these 35 students, examination was conducted and result was declared by the University for 8930 students who appeared in the final examination for the B.Ed. Course, 2005. Subsequently, forgery was committed and additional pages were attached with the tabulation chart raising number of students to 12,472. These excess students adjusted in the tabulation chart by adding pages in the tabulation chart, were not the students of any Degree college for B.Ed, Course, 2005. They were fraudulently shown to have been awarded marks from 75% to 82%.
(iii) The Division Bench Judgment of Lucknow Bench in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (Supra) is confined to private un-aided professional institutes/colleges, which were total 25 in number, in which upto 35% excess students for B.Ed Course, 2005 were allowed to appear in the examination. The SIT determined the number of fake students after adjusting these excess students, which fact is evident from the computation chart annexed with the SIT report. Thus the contention of the petitioners is that the aforesaid extra students have been declared as fake, is incorrect and baseless.
(iv) The SIT, during the investigation; recovered 8899 award foils (mark foils) as evident from para 3 and 7 of the SIT report. These award foils related to all 82 affiliated colleges. On verification of tabulation chart with mark foils, tampering was found with respect to 1053 students, whereby originally secured 2nd and 3rd Division marks were raised to 80% to 82% and thus by tampering 1st Division was shown. The University has initiated appropriate proceeding in matters of tampered marksheets, which are pending disposal.
(v) Thus fraud was played by interested persons including employees and the students and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief. Reliance is placed on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2003 (8) SCC 311 (para nos. 13,14, 15), 2003 (8) SCC 319 (Para 15 to 29), 2004 (6) SCC 325 (12) and 2017 (8) SCC 670.
(vi) In the case of fraud, report of SIT can be relied particularly when none of the petitioners have either alleged the SIT report to be bad nor they challenge it. Petitioners' contention that the SIT has prepared the report without giving effect to the Division Bench Judgment of Lucknow Bench of this Court in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (Supra), is wholly incorrect and baseless. The SIT has adjusted excess admitted students which fact is evident from the chart annexed with the SIT report, which is part of the SIT report.
(vii) None of the petitioners have challenged the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the University. The University has declared the petitioners as fake students. The employment obtained by fake students on the basis of forged/fake B.Ed Degree, have been lawfully cancelled by the impugned orders placed by the respective District Basic Education Officer.
Submission on behalf of the counsel for the District Basic Education Officer and U.P. Basic Education Board.
29. None of the counsels for the District Basic Education Officers and U.P. Basic Education Board argued the case. They simply stated that they are supporting the impugned orders.
Discussion and Finding
30. I have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of writ petitions.
Background And Effect of Judgment in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Case - Confined to Private Unaided Colleges
31. There were 84 degree colleges affiliated with the respondent Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra, out of which two colleges were not granted permission for B.Ed. Course by the National Council for Teachers Education (for short "NCTE"). Thus, total 82 colleges were affiliated and were having permission from NCTE for different number of seats for B.Ed. Course 2005. Out of these 82 colleges, 25 colleges were private unaided professional colleges.
32. As per Government order dated 09.09.2004 issued by the State Government, the admission through the University and the management quota was in the ratio of 85:15. However, these private unaided professional colleges were insisting for more admission under management quota. Therefore some Private unaided Professional Colleges challenged the aforesaid Government order dated 09.09.2004 in writ petition No.90 (MS) of 2005 and by order dated 25.09.2005, the writ petition was dismissed against which a Special Appeal No.220 of 2005 was filed in which an interim order was granted by the Division Bench providing for admission in the ratio of 50:50 in the light of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Islamic Academy of Education Vs. State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697.
33. In TMA Pie Foundation Vs. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481 (paras 67 to 72) a constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the right of Management to fill up seats for admission in private unaided professional institution and held that such institutions are entitled for autonomy in their administration while, at the same time, they can not forego or discard the principle of merit and therefore it would be permissible for the University or the Government at the time of granting recognition, to require a private unaided institution to provide for merit based selection while, at the same time, giving the management sufficient discretion in admitting students. The prescription of percentage for this purpose has to be done by the Government according to the Government needs and different percentages can be fixed for minority unaided and non - minority unaided professional colleges and the same principle may be applied to other non professional but unaided educational institution viz. Graduation and post graduation non professional colleges or institutions.
34. Thereafter, the constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Islamic Academy of Education Vs. State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697 (paras 18 to 21) considered the aforesaid paragraph 68 of the judgment in the case of TMA Pie (Supra) with respect to unaided professional colleges and for admission for the year 2003-04 directed that the seats be filled up by the institution and the State Government in the ratio of 50:50.
35. The respondent Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, University, Agra, invited applications for admission in B.Ed. Session 2004-05. The last date for submission of application was 31.05.2004. Entrance examination was conducted on 04.07.2004. counseling for first phase, second phase and last phase was conducted between 25.11.2004 to 18.03.2005. The final examination for B.Ed. Session 2005 was held between 10.05.2006 to 24.05.2006. It appears that private unaided affiliated colleges were insisting for 50% admission through management quota. The Writ Petition No.399 (MB) of 2007 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Versus State of U.P. and others) was heard and decided on 06.04.2007 alongwith Special Appeal No.220 of 2005 (Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College Versus State of U.P. and others). In the aforesaid judgment the Division Bench specifically noted that the colleges before it are private unaided colleges who have admitted upto 50% students under management quota and the examination has been conducted by the university after accepting their examination forms alongwith fee and had issued admit cards in the light of the constitution Bench judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court as aforementioned including the judgment in the case of P.A. Inamdar Vs. State of Maharashtra 2005 6 SCC 537 (paras 130, 137 and 154). The Division Bench (in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College case) held that the ratio of seats between the State and the Management in the Colleges in question would be 50:50 and the University was not competent to send a list of students beyond the aforesaid prescription. However, to protect the excess upto 35% students sent by the University for admission, the Division Bench held that in the given circumstances there is no fault of students nor any motive can be attributed to the colleges who have admitted them in the College in accordance with merit and the University has declared result of 85 students though it was having authority to send students upto 50% in terms of the interim order and, therefore, the University shall declare the result of the students who have been admitted by the colleges in question and shall issue marksheets.
36. Thus, the crux of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (supra) was that the University was to declare result of 85% students admitted in private unaided professional colleges and 50% students admitted by such colleges under Management quota.
Undisputed facts and result of Investigation
37. There were only 25 private unaided professional colleges for B.Ed. Course affiliated to the respondent - University out of total 84 Colleges. Eventually a Writ C No.2906 of 2013 (Sunil Kumar Vs. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, University and another) was filed before this Court in which it came to light by preliminary inquiry report that the state of affairs in the University are shocking. The Superintendent of Police CBCID in his report dated 03.06.2014 has recommended for investigation by Special Investigation Agency. Case Crime No.48 of 2014, registered under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC read with Section 34, P.S. Hari Parvat Agra was brought to the notice of the Court. The report also mentioned that several employees of the University are involved in fabrication and manufacture of statement of marks and degrees of the University. The police has also recovered several computers, lap tops, printers and pen drives from the accused persons. In the aforesaid case of Sunil Kumar (supra) learned single Judge passed orders dated 23.01.2014, 14.03.2014, 05.05.2014, 02.07.2014, 20.08.2014, 15.09.2014 and lastly 09.09.2015. By order dated 09.09.2015 the writ petition was converted into Public Interest Litigation. Pursuant to the order of this court dated 14.03.2014, a Special Investigating Team was constituted by the State Government by order dated 29.04.2014 and consequential order dated 29.04.2014 was issued by the Director General of Police U.P. Lucknow. The Special Investigation Team (for short SIT) carried out the investigation and submitted its report dated 14.08.2017 under the signature of the Additional Superintendent of Police SIT UP Lucknow. Perusal of the SIT report shows that several criminal cases have been registered in the matter of fake degrees and tampered marksheets etc. which also includes employees and Officers of the University. The SIT also recovered from the University Campus all the award foils (marks foils). Award foil is a document prepared and signed by the examiner containing details of marks awarded. On the basis of award foils marksheets are prepared. These foils of 82 Colleges were recovered by the SIT. Out of 84 colleges, two colleges, namely, Jay Murti College Firozabad and Kehrinal Gautam Smarak College, Aligarh were not granted permission/recognition by the NCTE and yet 147 marksheets each of these two colleges were managed and fraudulently procured by fake students.
38. The facts and figures based on records including the S.I.T. report relating to B.Ed. Course 2005, are summarized as under:-
SUMMARY (CHART) B.Ed. COURSE 2005 Sl.No. Particulars 57 Affiliated Aided Colleges for B.Ed. Course 2005 25 Private unaided colleges for B.Ed. Course 2005 2 Colleges not having permission for B.Ed. 2005 Total (84 Colleges) 1 Total seats for B.Ed. Course 2005 Allotted/ Sanctioned by N.C.T.E. 5,340 2,810 0 8,150 2 Admission by counselling 4,500 (About 85%) 1,404 (50%) 0 5,904 3 Admission by Management 718 (About 14%) 1,404 (50%) 0 2,122 4 Total students admitted (2+3) 5,218 2,808 0 8,026 5 Total students participated in B.Ed. Examination 8,899 6 Excess students participated in Examination (About 31%) due to allotment of seats by counselling up to 85% and by management up to 50% in 25 Private Unaided Colleges (5-4) 873 7 Result prepared by the Authorised Agency of the University and declared by the University 8,930 8 Result prepared by the Authorised Agency of the University in excess of students who participated in B.Ed. Examination 2005 (7-5) 31 9 Total students shown in the Tabulation Chart by adjustment by adding additional pages 12,472 10 Fake students adjusted in the Tabulation Chart as shown in the S.I.T. report dated 14.08.2017 (9-5) 3,573 11 Total fake students finally found and notices dated 18.12.2019 issued to them by the University as per list with the University and also uploaded on its official website as mentioned in the order of the University dated 07.02.2020 3,637 12 Persons who fraudulently shown B.Ed. Degrees bearing roll numbers allotted to other students (Notices dated 28.12.2019 issued. List uploaded on the official website of the University) 45 13 Total Tampered Marksheets found by the University and notices issued to concerned students 1,084 14 Total of Fake Students + Duplicate Roll Numbers + Tampered Marksheets (11+12+13) 4,766 Note: There are some minor totaling/ calculation error in the chart annexed to the S.I.T. Report relating to students admitted and fake students. Correct figures have been mentioned above.
39. The figures and facts as summarized in the chart above, have neither been disputed nor denied by the petitioners nor any error of facts have been shown or pointed out by the petitioners in the list/ number of fake students and tampered mark-sheets mentioned in the SIT report and the list annexed nor the SIT reports have been shown to me to have been challenged before any court.
40. Alongwith the aforesaid SIT report, College wise list of B.Ed. 2005 have been annexed by the SIT which is part of the report, which contains college wise details of total seats sanctioned by the NCTE, admission by counseling, admission by management quota, total students (counseling + management), total students shown in the tabulation chart, number of students as per award foil, total fake students and total tampered marksheets in tabulation chart etc. Perusal of the aforesaid summary shows that the private unaided colleges admitted upto 50% students. The SIT adjusted all the excess admitted students in these 25 private unaided professional colleges. Thus, the submissions of learned counsels for the petitioners that the SIT has not considered the excess admitted students whose results were declared in terms of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (supra); is incorrect, vague and baseless.
41. Without disputing the correctness of the facts relating to B.Ed. Course 2005 as briefly summarized in the chart in para 38 above, learned counsels for the petitioners mainly contended that the excess students who were admitted and who participated in B.Ed. 2005 examination in terms of orders passed by the Division Bench in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (supra) have been declared fake. The stand so taken by the petitioners falling under the category of fake students, is factually incorrect and totally baseless. Learned counsels for the petitioners have also not disputed clear instances of frauds mentioned in the S.I.T. report dated 14.08.2017 and various F.I.Rs. lodged with the concerned Police Stations.
42. Perusal of facts and figures based on records as briefly summarised in para 38 above reveals that there were total 8150 sanctioned seats for B.Ed. Course 2005 out of which 5340 seats were in 57 Affiliated Aided Colleges. Remaining 2810 seats were in 25 private unaided colleges to which benefit of Division Bench orders in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College case (supra) was extended. Perusal of item Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the chart in para-38 above leaves no doubt that the ratio of admission by counselling and management was maintained. Total 8899 students including 873 excess students who participated in the B.Ed. 2005 examination, their results were also declared. These 8,899 genuine students and 3637 + 45 fake students have been segregated. Notices dated 28.12.2019 have been issued by the University to the aforesaid fake students.
Observations/ findings in orders passed in Writ-C No.2906 of 2013 and the final order dated 20.01.2020 in Writ-A No.468 of 2020 (Tilak Singh and 495 others vs. State of U.P. and 4 others):-
43. I have already reproduced in paragraph-5 above the relevant paragraphs of the judgment and order dated 20.01.2020 passed by this court in the case of Tilak Singh and 495 others (supra), which refers important facts and also the orders passed in Writ-C No.2906 of 2013. From the order dated 12.03.2013 passed in Writ-C No.2906 of 2013 as reproduced in the aforequoted order in the case of Tilak Singh and 495 others (supra), it is evident that cross list pertaining to B.Ed. Examination 2005 was produced by the University before the Court and it was noticed by the court that none of its pages bear signature of any officer, which prima facie, appeared to be a manufactured document. It was stated that all cross lists of other examinations are duly signed by the officers of the University. In the aforequoted order in the case of Tilak Singh and 495 others (supra), this court rejected contentions of the learned counsels for the petitioners that exercise undertaken by the Executive Council is not an independent exercise but has been done at the behest of the State Government. This court observed that the University had full knowledge about the fact that large scale fraud has been committed in issuing the fake and tampered marks sheet of B.Ed. Examination-2005. This court further observed that the procedure contemplated under the State Universities Act, 1973, cannot be said to be applicable to cancel those degrees which according to the University have not been issued by it and have been procured by the candidates from outside with which the University has no concern. The court further observed that in the case in hand, the Executive Council has undertaken the exercise to verify and sort out list of candidates whose degree or marks sheet are fake and list of candidates whose marks sheet are tampered and list of candidates who have appeared with the roll number allotted to many other candidates. This court further observed that a perusal of the questionnaire reveals that it has not sought any information which cannot be said to be available with the petitioners. The information sought through the aforesaid questionnaire are essential to find out and segregate fake and tampered marks sheet/degree. This Court while exercising power under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot shut its eyes about the entire chain of events which had led to unearth scam of such a magnitude where fake marks sheet have been procured by the candidates with impunity and on the basis of such fake or tampered marks sheet, they have obtained employment as Assistant Teacher.
44. The findings recorded by this court as briefly mentioned in the preceding paragraph, have not been disputed by learned counsels for the petitioners during the course of their arguments. Learned counsels for the petitioners have neither stated nor shown that the judgment and order dated 20.01.2020 in the case of Tilak Singh and 495 others (supra), has been challenged by any of the petitioners or any other person before any court or the said order has been interfered with.
Exercise undertaken by the University
45. The respondent University under took the exercise to deal with fake students and matters of tampered marksheets/degrees. The executive council in its meeting dated 06.12.2019 considered all the issues relating to the fake students and tampered marksheets etc. and resolved to make public the list of fake students and tampered marksheets and to issue notices to them. Pursuant to the decision of the executive council dated 06.12.2019, the list of 3637 fake students, 1084 students having tampered marksheets and 45 persons having fake duplicate roll numbers were uploaded on the official website of the University on 28.12.2019. Notices were also issued and uploaded on the official website. Notices were also published in largely circulated daily news papers requiring all the three categories of persons to submit information on the points mentioned in the questionnaire within 15 days, online and by registered/speed post.
46. By the aforesaid notices the University required the fake students to submit 17 informations, namely, name of students, permanent/correspondence address, mobile number and Adhar Card number, father's name, roll number of entrance examination, name of college where admission taken through counselling or under Management quota, counseling number/place in management quota list and to annex copy of counseling letter, particulars of fees deposited at the time of admission in degree college, particulars of scholarship, enrollment number, roll number in final B.Ed. Examination 2005, name of examination center in final B.Ed. Examination 2005, photo copy of admit card of B.Ed. Examination 2005, self attested mark-sheet of B.Ed. 2005, Provisional certificate, if any, issued by the University, particulars of original degree, and any other particulars/information.
47. Vide Para-33 of the judgment in Tilak Singh and 495 others (supra), this court held that perusal of the aforesaid questionnaire reveals that it has not sought any information which can be said to be not available with the petitioners and these informations are essential to find out and segregate fake and tampered marks sheet/ degree. Despite this, out of 3637 fake students, 2823 have neither responded nor submitted any information. Response from only 814 persons of fake students list were received by the University. Out of these 814 students, 796 students have not submitted any information/papers. Only 18 students have submitted informations/papers. Matters of these 814 students are pending decision before the University. In para 13 of the supplementary counter affidavit the University has stated that decision shall be taken within 21 days in respect of these 814 persons.
48. The aforesaid notice was challenged by large number of persons in WRIT - A No. - 468 of 2020 (Tilak Singh And 495 Others Vs. State Of U P And 4 Others) which was dismissed by this Court by order dated 20.01.2020, with the following observations/directions :-
(i) The University while verifying the mark-sheet/degree of a candidate may not refuse to consider the questionnaire of a candidate if the same does not bear the signature & seal of the Principal of the college.
(ii) In case after verification, the University disowns the degree of a candidate being fake, the University is not required to follow the procedure contemplated under the Act, 1973 for cancellation of degree/marks sheet. However, it is desirable in the interest of justice and fairplay that the University in such cases should pass reasoned and speaking order giving the basis on which it has formed opinion that degree is fake and has not been issued by the University.
(iii). In case University finds that the degree/marks sheet have been issued by it though tampered, in such an event, the University is expected to follow the procedure provided in the Act, 1973 and give a show cause notice to such candidate and thereafter, pass appropriate orders.
49. It would be relevant to mention that most of the submissions of the petitioners as made in this batch of writ petitions were also made by the petitioners in Tilak Singh And 495 Others (supra) and the same were rejected by the aforesaid order dated 20.01.2020, relevant portion of which has been reproduced in para 5 above. None of the learned counsels for the petitioners have pointed out or stated before me that any of the petitioners or any other person have challenged the aforesaid order of this court dated 20.01.2020 in the case of Tilak Singh And 495 Others (supra).
50. A supplementary counter affidavit of Dr. Rajiv Kumar Registrar/Controller of Examinations of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, University, Agra, was filed on behalf of respondent - University in the leading Writ A No.190 of 2020, annexing therewith a copy of the order dated 07.02.2020, passed by the Vice-Chancellor declaring 2823 persons as fake students.
51. Learned counsel for the University has provided complete copies of the aforesaid supplementary Counter Affidavit to the learned Senior Advocates appearing in this batch of writ petitions.
52. A list of 2,823 fake students alongwith other particulars is annexed as part of the order dated 07.02.2020 passed by the respondent-University. Perusal of this order shows that out of 3,637 fake students, 2,823 have not submitted any information/reply or objection before the University. The online applications and by registered/speed posts were received by the University only from 814 students, out of which 796 have not submitted information as required in the questionnaire. Only 18 students have submitted all the required information. The petitioners who have been declared fake students by the University by order dated 07.02.2020 have not challenged the said order either separately or by filing amendment applications. Thus, the petitioners who obtained appointments on the post of Assistant Teachers on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees and who fall under 2,823 fake students declared by the University, their orders of cancellation of appointments or dismissal from service on the ground of obtaining appointments on the basis of fake B.Ed. 2005 degree can not be interfered with by invoking, equitable and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The concerned District Basic Education Officers shall find out petitioners within four weeks from today from Appendix I to this Judgement. Those petitioners who have been declared fake students as per Appendix I, their order of cancellation of appointments or dismissal from service passed by the concerned District Basic Education Officer are affirmed. The concerned District Basic Education Officers or other authorities shall be free to take further action in accordance with law against such petitioners including recovery of benefits obtained by the petitioners under the interim orders of this Court.
Whether regular disciplinary proceedings are required to be initiated in matters of petitioners who obtained employment on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees:-
53. Undisputedly, the petitioners who fall under the list of fake students, have obtained appointments on the post of Assistant Teacher on the basis of their fake B.Ed. Degrees. Regular disciplinary proceedings under the U.P. Basic Educational Staff Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1973") and the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1999"), have not been initiated by the respective District Basic Education Officers before passing the impugned orders for cancellation their appointments or dismissal from service. The arguments of the learned counsels for the petitioners that the petitioners could not be dismissed from service or their appointments could not be cancelled without initiating proceedings under the Rules of 1973 and the Rules of 1999, have no substance under the facts and circumstances of the case.
54. Undisptuedly, B.Ed. was the essential qualification for appointment of the petitioners on the post of assistant teachers. The petitioners falling under the list of fake students, have obtained government employment on the post of assistant teachers, on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees. This was a fraudulent act. It is settled law that fraud and justice never dwell together. The forgery is in the basic eligibility conditions for appointments on the post of assistant teachers inasmuch as B.Ed. Degrees are fake. Consequently, these appointments are NULL and VOID. Therefore, the process of appointments of the petitioners who obtained government employment on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees, stand vitiated.
55. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. v. Raghuwar Pal Singh, (2018) 15 SCC 463 had examined a case, where the appointment letter was issued without approval of the competent authority. The question arose whether such appointment letter would be a case of nullity or a mere irregularity? In case of nullity, affording opportunity to the incumbent would be a mere formality and non-grant of opportunity may not vitiate the final decision of termination of his services. Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in absence of prior approval of the competent authority, the Director Incharge could not have hastened issuance of the appointment letter. The act of commission and omission of the Director Incharge would, therefore, suffer from the vice of lack of authority and nullity in law.
56. In Nidhi Kaim & Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., (2017) 4 SCC 1, a three Judge Bench dealt with admission of students to MBBS Course on the basis of illegal and unfair admission process and held as under:
"92. ...Having given our thoughtful consideration to the above submission, we are of the considered view that conferring rights or benefits on the appellants, who had consciously participated in a well thought out, and meticulously orchestrated plan, to circumvent well laid down norms, for gaining admission to the MBBS course, would amount to espousing the cause of "the unfair". It would seem like allowing a thief to retain the stolen property. It would seem as if the Court was not supportive of the cause of those who had adopted and followed rightful means. Such a course would cause people to question the credibility of the justice-delivery system itself. The exercise of jurisdiction in the manner suggested on behalf of the appellants would surely depict the Court's support in favour of the sacrilegious. It would also compromise the integrity of the academic community. We are of the view that in the name of doing complete justice it is not possible for this Court to support the vitiated actions of the appellants through which they gained admission to the MBBS course.
xx xx xx
94. ...Even in situations where a juvenile indulges in crime, he has to face trial, and is subjected to the postulated statutory consequences. Law, has consequences. And the consequences of law brook no exception. The appellants in this case, irrespective of their age, were conscious of the regular process of admission. They breached the same by devious means. They must therefore, suffer the consequences of their actions. It is not the first time that admissions obtained by deceitful means would be cancelled. This Court has consistently annulled academic gains arising out of wrongful admissions. Acceptance of the prayer made by the appellants on the parameter suggested by them would result in overlooking the large number of judgments on the point. Adoption of a different course, for the appellants, would trivialise the declared legal position. Reference in this behalf may be made to the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel representing Vyapam.
xx xx xx xx xx
108. ...In the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, it would not be proper to legitimise the admission of the appellants to the MBBS course in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution. We, therefore, hereby decline the above prayer made on behalf of the appellants."
43) In another three Judge Bench judgment in Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India & Ors. v. Jagdish Balaram Bahira & Ors.(2017) 8 SCC 670, the Court was examining the consequences of false caste certificate produced to seek appointment. The Court held as under:
"69. For these reasons, we hold and declare that:
xx xx xx 69.3. The decisions of this Court in R.Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala, (2004) 2 SCC 105 : 2004 SCC (L&S) 350] and in Union of India v. Dattatray, (2008) 4 SCC 612 :(2008) 2 SCC (L&S) 6, which were rendered by Benches of three Judges laid down the principle of law that where a benefit is secured by an individual-such as an appointment to a post or admission to an educational institution--on the basis that the candidate belongs to a reserved category for which the benefit is reserved, the invalidation of the caste or tribe claim upon verification would result in the appointment or, as the case may be, the admission being rendered void or non est. xx xx xx 69.7. Withdrawal of benefits secured on the basis of a caste claim which has been found to be false and is invalidated is a necessary consequence which flows from the invalidation of the caste claim and no issue of retrospectivity would arise;"
(Emphasis supplied by me)
57. A Full Bench of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Rita Mishra & Ors. v. Director, Primary Education, Bihar & Ors. AIR 1988 Patna 26 has dealt with appointment in the education department claiming salary although the letter of appointment was forged, fraudulent and illegal. The Full Bench declined to grant such claim and held that "the right to salary stricto sensu springs from a legal right to validly hold the post for which salary is claimed. It is a right consequential to a valid appointment to such post. Therefore, where the very root is non-existent, there cannot subsist a branch thereof in the shape of a claim to salary. The rights to salary, pension and other service benefits are entirely statutory in nature in public service. Therefore, these rights, including the right to salary, spring from a valid and legal appointment to the post. Once it is found that the very appointment is illegal and is non est in the eye of law, no statutory entitlement for salary or consequential rights of pension and other monetary benefits can arise."
58. The aforesaid judgment of Full Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Rita Mishra (supra) was approved by a three Judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in R. Vishwanatha Pillai Vs. State of Kerala & Ors. (2004) 2 SCC 105.
59. A three Judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Of Bihar Vs. Kirti Narayan Prasad, decided on 30th November 2018 {reported in 2019 (1) ESC 3} has considered the matter of appointments made on the basis of forged appointment letter and held as under:
"17. In the instant cases the writ petitioners have filed the petitions before the High Court with a specific prayer to regularize their service and to set aside the order of termination of their services. They have also challenged the report submitted by the State Committee. The real controversy is whether the writ petitioners were legally and validly appointed. The finding of the State Committee is that many writ petitioners had secured appointment by producing fake or forged appointment letter or had been inducted in Government service surreptitiously by concerned Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer by issuing a posting order. The writ petitioners are the beneficiaries of illegal orders made by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer. They were given notice to establish the genuineness of their appointment and to show cause. None of them could establish the genuineness or legality of their appointment before the State Committee. The State Committee on appreciation of the materials on record has opined that their appointment was illegal and void ab initio.We do not find any ground to disagree with the finding of the State Committee. In the circumstances, the question of regularisation of their services by invoking para 53 of the judgment in Umadevi (supra) does not arise. Since the appointment of the petitioners is ab initio void, they cannot be said to be the civil servants of the State. Therefore, holding disciplinary proceedings envisaged byArticle 311of the Constitution or under any other disciplinary rules shall not arise."
60. Thus, those petitioners who have secured appointments on the basis of forged B.Ed. Degrees or marksheets and on that basis they have been inducted in Government service then they became beneficiary of illegal and fraudulent appointments. Such appointments are void ab initio. Therefore, holding disciplinary proceedings against them as envisaged by Article 311 of the Constitution of India or under any disciplinary rules including the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973 or the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1999, shall not arise.
Petitioners falling under the list of fake students whose matters are pending decision before the University:-
61. Pursuant to the notices dated 28.12.2019, total 814 persons falling under the list of fake students, have submitted online applications, out of which, 796 persons have not submitted the required information/papers. Only 18 persons have submitted the required information/papers. However, matters of all the 814 persons falling under the list of fake students/ fake B.Ed. Degrees, are pending decision before the University. In paragraph-13 of the supplementary counter affidavit dated 10.02.2020 filed in leading Writ-A No.190 of 2020, the respondent-University has stated that decision with regard to 814 persons will be taken within 21 days. However, it has not been brought on record whether the decision has been taken by the University or not with respect to 814 persons.
62. Therefore, the respondent-University is directed to take appropriate decision, in the matter of the aforesaid 814 persons falling in the list of fake students within three months from today, if decision has not been taken by the University as yet. In the event, the University is not able to take decision within the aforesaid period of three months due to some sound reason then before expiry of the period, it may apply before this court for extension of time narrating the reasons and annexing therewith copies of relevant papers in support of reasons. The respondent-University shall communicate the decision so taken to the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj and the concerned alleged students within next three days of the decision and shall also upload it on its official website. The Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board shall communicate the aforesaid decision of the University to the concerned District Basic Education Officers within next one week. Those petitioners who fall under the list of the aforesaid 814 fake students, their impugned orders of cancellation of appointments or dismissal from service shall abide by the decision of the University as aforesaid. Those petitioners whose B.Ed. Degree are declared fake by the University, their orders of cancellation of appointment/ dismissal from service shall sand affirmed. Those petitioners whose B.Ed. Degrees are found genuine by the respondent - University, their order of cancellation of appointments/ dismissal from service shall be immediately recalled by the concerned District Basic Education Officer. For a period of four months from today or till the decision of the University as aforesaid, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners falling under the aforesaid list of 814 fake students. However, payment of salary shall be made only to those petitioners whose B.Ed. Degrees are found by the University to be genuine. It is further directed that if the respondent - University does not take decision within the stipulated period or within the extended period, if any, in respect of the aforesaid 814 persons, then an amount equivalent to 10% of the total salary of the petitioners falling under the list of the aforesaid 814 persons whose B.Ed. Degrees are found to be fake, shall be recovered by the State Government from the personal salary/assets of the Vice Chancellor, the Registrar and other responsible officers and employees of the University, who may be found by the State Government to be guilty to delay the decision. The recovery shall be made from them in such ratio as may be determined by the State Government. The period of three months to take decision, if not taken so far; has been granted to the University keeping in mind the period of lock-down and other hardships due to Pandemic COVID-19.
Tampered Marksheets
63. The respondent University has not yet taken decision in matters of petitioners who have allegedly obtained employment on the basis of tampered marksheet. The decision is to be taken by the respondent University in such matters in the light of the observations made by this Court dated 20.01.2020 in WRIT - A No. - 468 of 2020. These matters are still pending decision before the University. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice the respondent University is directed to conclude entire proceedings in accordance with law in matters of tampered mark-sheet, within six months from today and pass reasoned order/ orders and upload it on its official website. The respondent University within a week thereafter shall send a copy of the decision to the Secretary U.P. Basic Education Board, the concerned petitioners and the concerned District Basic Education Officers. For a period of six months or till orders as aforesaid are passed, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners falling under the list of tampered mark sheets, but payment of salary to them shall be made after their mark sheets/degrees are found genuine. Those petitioners whose B.Ed. Marksheets/degrees are held by the respondent - University to be tampered, their impugned orders of cancellation of appointments/dismissal from service passed by the concerned District Basic Education Officers, shall stand affirmed and the State-respondents shall be free to take further action in accordance with law, if any, including recovery of benefits obtained by such petitioners under the interim orders of this Court. Those petitioners whose marksheets/degrees are found genuine by the respondent University, their order of cancellation of appointment/dismissal from service shall be recalled by the concerned District Basic Education Officers within one week from the date of receipt of decision of the respondent University. The period of six months as aforesaid has been granted to the University keeping in mind the lock-down period and other hardships due to Pandemic COVID-19. However, liberty is granted to the University to apply for extension of time for strong and cogent reasons.
Analysis of other submissions of the petitioners:-
64. Learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ-A No.12792 of 2019, Writ-A No.14097 of 2019 and Writ-A No.2858 of 2018, has submitted that mark-sheets of the petitioners have been alleged to be tampered whereas no such allegation can be made in view of the fact that the marks mentioned in their marksheets are lower-than the marks mentioned in the tabulation chart. If it is so, then these petitioners allegedly of tampered marksheet category, may appear before the respondent-University in response to the notices issued by the University and may raise all their objections before the University.
65. Sri Dinesh Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ-A No.60007 of 2017 has submitted that the name of the petitioner is neither in the list of fake students nor in the list of tampered marksheet. Therefore, the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner from service is not sustainable. This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the show cause notice dated 18.11.2017 issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Kasganj. Proper course for the petitioner is to submit reply before the authority concerned. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit reply before the authority concerned within six weeks from today, if not submitted so far and the authority concerned shall take an appropriate decision in accordance with law within next six weeks.
66. Sri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi while arguing in Writ-A No.467 of 2020, Writ-A No.377 of 2020, Writ-A No.367 of 2020 and Writ-A No.939 of 2020, has submitted that the B.Ed. Degrees of the petitioners are of the batch 2003-04 while report of the SIT is with respect to the B.Ed. Batch 2004-05 and, therefore, the petitioners could not have been declared as fake students. Perusal of the impugned order dated 04.01.2020 in Writ-A No.939 of 2020 shows that the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground of tampered marksheets. Perusal of paragraphs-8 and 9 of the writ petition prima facie shows that the petitioner completed his B.Ed. in the year 2004. However, there is no consideration of this fact by the District Basic Education Officer, Etawah. Therefore, the order dated 04.01.2020 impugned in Writ-A No.939 of 2020, is quashed. Liberty is granted to the respondent District Basic Education Officer, Etawah to pass an order afresh in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. So far as the Writ-A Nos.367, 377 and 467, all of 2020 are concerned, I find that the alleged marks-sheets of the petitioners are of B.Ed. Examination 2005 which do not even bear enrollment number. Thus, facts of these writ petitions are different from Writ-A No.939 of 2020. The petitioners of these Writ-A Nos.367, 377 and 467, all of 2020 may participate in the proceeding before the University, if they fall under the category of Tampered Mark-sheets. If they fall under the category of fake students and have been/ are declared fake students by the University, then impugned order of cancellation of appointment or dismissal from service shall stand affirmed.
67. Learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ-A No.320 of 2020 has submitted that the petitioner's appointment has been cancelled by the impugned order dated 11.12.2019 on the ground that he is fake student and obtained employment on the basis of B.Ed. Degree of the Academic Session 2004-05 of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra, bearing Roll No.5129087. In paragraph-5 of the writ petition, the petitioner has mentioned that he has passed B.Ed. in the year 2002 from University of Calcutta. He has filed copy of B.Ed. Marksheet of University of Calcutta of B.Ed. Examination 2002 as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. He has also filed photostat copy of a self attested marksheet of B.Ed. 2005 of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra as Annexure-16 to the writ petition and has alleged in paragraph-18 of the writ petition that the District Basic Education Officer has provided copy of the aforesaid B.Ed. 2005 mark-sheet. In paragraph-17, the petitioner has alleged to have submitted a reply dated 28.11.2019 before the respondent No.4 in response to the notice dated 18.11.2019 in which he mentioned about his B.Ed. Degree, 2002 from University of Calcutta. He has stated that he has neither applied for B.Ed. Course 2005 from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra nor has obtained employment on the basis of B.Ed. Degree of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University. This aspect of the matter has not been considered in the impugned order dated 11.12.2019. Therefore, the impugned order dated 11.12.2019 is quashed. The respondent No.4 is directed to pass a reasoned order afresh in accordance with law within six weeks. While passing the order, the respondent No.4 shall also examine records relating to the petitioner for obtaining employment as Assistant Teacher and other relevant material before him, without being influenced by any of the observations made in this paragraph. The writ petition is disposed of with these observations.
Judgments relied by petitioners:
68. Sri R.K. Ojha has relied upon certain judgments mentioned in Para-26 above, which are distinguishable on facts of the present case. In Roop Singh Negi's case (supra) relied by him, the facts were that Roop Singh was a peon in the bank and disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him after five years of the incidence of issuance of some bank drafts which were alleged to have been issued from a book, which was allegedly taken away by the aforesaid peon. It was found that the draft book remained in custody of the branch manager. No witness was examined to prove relied upon documents. The only basic evidence relied by the Inquiry Officer was the purported confession of Roop Singh before the police, for which the Roop Singh stated that he was forced to sign on the said confession as he was tortured in the police station. On these facts, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that departmental proceeding is a quasi judicial proceeding and inquiry report was found to be not based on any evidence. The facts of the present cases are entirely different, which have been discussed in detail in preceding paragraphs. Therefore, this judgment is of no help to the petitioner. In the case of Subodh Kumar Prasad (supra), the facts were that services of the appellant in that case who was compounder, were terminated on the basis of receipt of a letter from the Civil Surgeon that no appointment letter was issued. On peculiar facts of that case, Hon'ble Supreme Court distinguished its judgment in the case of Ashwini Kumar and set aside the order passed by the disciplinary authority. The principles of law regarding cancellation of appointment or dismissal from service in matters where the basic eligibility certificate is forged or fake, has been settled in various judgments and some of the judgments have been discussed and followed by me as mentioned in preceding paragraph Nos.52 to 58 of this judgment. The judgment in the case of Union of India vs. Ashok Kumar (supra), is also distinguishable on facts of the present cases. In the relied upon paragraph-37 of the said judgment, this court held that the allegation of fraud, i.e. the charge levelled could not be proved by adducing any cogent and credible evidence before the Inquiry Officer and the entire attempt of the petitioners (Union of India) was that ex parte inquiry conducted by vigilance authorities and conclusion drawn by them shall be taken as a conclusive evidence to uphold the punishment. In the present cases, the facts are entirely different. The respondent - University has declared certain persons to be fake students after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing. These petitioners have even failed to supply the essential informations and documents relating to their alleged B.Ed. Degrees. With respect to remaining fake students and tampered marksheets, matters are still pending before the University. Thus, the judgment relied is distinguishable on the facts of the present cases. The judgment in the case of LIC of India and others (supra), is on entirely different set of facts and principles. The judgment in the case of S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, (1990) 4 SCC 594 relied by Sri Shashi Nandan, learned senior advocate, is with respect to the necessity of recording of reasons by an authority while exercising quasi judicial function. In the present set of facts, notices were issued and all the persons who were classified as fake students, were required to submit certain informations and copies of certain essential papers relating to their alleged B.Ed. degrees, which were not submitted by them. With respect to remaining persons who submitted reply, matters are pending decision before the respondent-University. The judgment of Kerla High Court dated 22.06.2017 in Criminal Misc. Case No.1877 of 2015 relied by Sri Ashok Khare, relates to a criminal case.
CONCLUSION:-
69. In view of the above discussion and findings, my conclusions are briefly as under:-
(i) Crux of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (supra) was that the University was to declare result of 85% students admitted in private unaided professional colleges and 50% students admitted by such colleges under Management quota.
(ii) The SIT adjusted all the excess admitted students in these 25 private unaided professional colleges, i.e. upto 85% students by counselling and upto 50% students by management as evident from the facts and figures mentioned in item Nos.1 to 7 of Para-38 above. Thus, the submissions of learned counsels for the petitioners that the SIT has not considered the excess admitted students whose results were declared in terms of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College (supra); is incorrect, vague and baseless.
(iii) Perusal of facts and figures based on records as briefly summarised in para 38 above reveals that there were total 8150 sanctioned seats for B.Ed. Course 2005 out of which 5340 seats were in 57 Affiliated Aided Colleges. Remaining 2810 seats were in 25 private unaided colleges to which benefit of Division Bench orders in Shri Puran Prasad Gupta Memorial Degree College case (supra) was extended. Perusal of item Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the chart in para-38 above leaves no doubt that the ratio of admission by counselling and management was maintained. Total 8899 students including 873 excess students who participated in the B.Ed. 2005 examination, their results were also declared. These 8,899 genuine students and 3637 + 45 fake students have been segregated. Notices dated 28.12.2019 have been issued by the University to the aforesaid fake students.
(iv) Pursuant to the decision of the Executive Council dated 06.12.2019, the list of 3637 fake students, 1084 students having tampered marksheets and 45 persons having fake duplicate roll numbers were uploaded on the official website of the University on 28.12.2019. Notices were also issued and uploaded on the official website. Notices were also published in largely circulated daily news papers requiring all the three categories of persons to submit information on the points mentioned in the questionnaire within 15 days, online and by registered/speed post.
(v) Vide Para-33 of the judgment in Tilak Singh and 495 others (supra), this court held that perusal of the aforesaid questionnaire reveals that it has not sought any information which can be said to be not available with the petitioners and these informations are essential to find out and segregate fake and tampered marks sheet/ degree. Despite this, out of 3637 fake students, 2823 have neither responded nor submitted any information. Response from only 814 students of fake students list were received by the University. Out of these 814 students, 796 students have not submitted any information/papers. Only 18 students have submitted informations/papers. Matters of these 814 students are pending decision before the University. In para 13 of the supplementary counter affidavit the University has stated that decision shall be taken within 21 days in respect of these 814 persons.
(vi) The petitioners who obtained appointments on the post of Assistant Teachers on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees and who fall under 2,823 fake students declared by the University, their orders of cancellation of appointments or dismissal from service on the ground of obtaining appointments on the basis of fake B.Ed. 2005 degree can not be interfered with by invoking, equitable and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The concerned District Basic Education Officers shall find out petitioners within four weeks from today from Appendix I to this Judgement. Those petitioners who have been declared fake students as per Appendix I, their order of cancellation of appointments or dismissal from service passed by the concerned District Basic Education Officer are affirmed. The concerned District Basic Education Officers or other authorities shall be free to take further action in accordance with law against such petitioners including recovery of benefits obtained by the petitioners under the interim orders of this Court.
(vii) Undisptuedly, B.Ed. was the essential qualification for appointment of the petitioners on the post of assistant teachers. The petitioners falling under the list of fake students, have obtained government employment on the post of assistant teachers, on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees. This was a fraudulent act. It is settled law that fraud and justice never dwell together. The forgery is in the basic eligibility conditions for appointments on the post of assistant teachers inasmuch as B.Ed. Degree are fake. Therefore, the process of appointments of the petitioners who obtained government employment on the basis of fake B.Ed. Degrees, stands vitiated.
(viii) Thus, those petitioners who have secured appointments on the basis of forged B.Ed. Degrees or marksheets and on that basis they have been inducted in Government service then they became beneficiary of illegal and fraudulent appointments. Such appointments are void ab initio. Therefore, holding disciplinary proceedings against them as envisaged by Article 311 of the Constitution of India or under any disciplinary rules including the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973 or the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1999, shall not arise.
(ix) The respondent-University is directed to take appropriate decision, in the matter of the aforesaid 814 persons falling in the list of fake students within three months from today, if decision has not been taken by the University as yet. In the event, the University is not able to take decision within the aforesaid period of three months due to some sound reason then before expiry of the period, it may apply before this court for extension of time narrating the reasons and annexing therewith copies of relevant papers in support of reasons. The respondent-University shall communicate the decision so taken to the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj and the concerned alleged students within next three days of the decision and shall also upload it on its official website. The Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board shall communicate the aforesaid decision of the University to the concerned District Basic Education Officers within next one week. Those petitioners who fall under the list of the aforesaid 814 fake students, their impugned orders of cancellation of appointments or dismissal from service shall abide by the decision of the University as aforesaid. Those petitioners whose B.Ed. Degree are declared fake by the University, their orders of cancellation of appointment/ dismissal from service shall sand affirmed. Those petitioners whose B.Ed. Degrees are found genuine by the respondent - University, their order of cancellation of appointments/ dismissal from service shall be immediately recalled by the concerned District Basic Education Officer. For a period of four months from today or till the decision of the University as aforesaid, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners falling under the aforesaid list of 814 fake students. However, payment of salary shall be made only to those petitioners whose B.Ed. Degrees are found by the University to be genuine. It is further directed that if the respondent - University does not take decision within the stipulated period or within the extended period, if any, in respect of the aforesaid 814 persons, then an amount equivalent to 10% of the total salary of the petitioners falling under the list of the aforesaid 814 persons whose B.Ed. Degrees are found to be fake, shall be recovered by the State Government from the personal salary/assets of the Vice Chancellor, the Registrar and other responsible officers and employees of the University, who may be found by the State Government to be guilty to delay the decision. The recovery shall be made from them in such ratio as may be determined by the State Government. The period of three months to take decision, if not taken so far; has been granted to the University keeping in mind the period of lock-down and other hardships due to Pandemic COVID-19.
(x) to meet the ends of justice the respondent University is directed to conclude entire proceedings in accordance with law in matters of tampered mark-sheet, within six months from today and pass reasoned order/ orders and upload it on its official website. The respondent University within a week thereafter shall send a copy of the decision to the Secretary U.P. Basic Education Board, the concerned petitioners and the concerned District Basic Education Officers. For a period of six months or till orders as aforesaid are passed, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners falling under the list of tampered mark sheets, but payment of salary to them shall be made after their mark sheets/degrees are found genuine. Those petitioners whose B.Ed. Marksheets/degrees are held by the respondent - University to be tampered, their impugned orders of cancellation of appointments/dismissal from service passed by the concerned District Basic Education Officers, shall stand affirmed and the State-respondents shall be free to take further action in accordance with law, if any, including recovery of benefits obtained by such petitioners under the interim orders of this Court. Those petitioners whose marksheets/degrees are found genuine by the respondent University, their order of cancellation of appointment/dismissal from service shall be recalled by the concerned District Basic Education Officers within one week from the date of receipt of decision of the respondent University. The period of six months as aforesaid has been granted to the University keeping in mind the lock-down period and other hardships due to Pandemic COVID-19. However, liberty is granted to the University to apply for extension of time for strong and cogent reasons.
(xi) Writ-A No.60007 of 2017 has been filed praying to quash the show cause notice dated 18.11.2017 issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Kasganj. Proper course for the petitioner is to submit reply before the authority concerned, who shall take decision in accordance with law as per direction in Para-65 above.
(xii) Perusal of the impugned order dated 04.01.2020 in Writ-A No.939 of 2020 shows that the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground of tampered marksheet. Perusal of paragraphs-8 and 9 of the writ petition prima facie shows that the petitioner completed his B.Ed. in the year 2004. However, there is no consideration of this fact by the District Basic Education Officer, Etawah. Therefore, the impugned order dated 04.01.2020 is quashed. Liberty is granted to the respondent District Basic Education Officer, Etawah to pass an order afresh in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
(xiii) In paragraph-5 of Writ-A No.320 of 2020, the petitioner has mentioned that he has passed B.Ed. in the year 2002 from University Calcutta. He has filed copy of B.Ed. Marksheet of University of Calcutta of B.Ed. Examination 2002 as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner has alleged to have submitted a reply dated 28.11.2019 before the respondent No.4 in response to the notice dated 18.11.2019 in which he mentioned about B.Ed. Degree, 2002 from University of Calcutta. He has stated that he has neither applied for B.Ed. Course 2005 from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra nor has obtained employment on the basis of B.Ed. Degree of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University. This aspect of the matter has not been considered in the impugned order dated 11.12.2019. Therefore, the impugned order dated 11.12.2019 is quashed. The respondent No.4 is directed to pass a reasoned order afresh in accordance with law within six weeks. While passing the order, the respondent No.4 shall also examine records relating to the petitioner for obtaining employment as Assistant Teacher and other relevant material before him, without being influenced by any of the observations made in Para-67 above.
70. With the aforesaid detail observations/ directions all the writ petitions are disposed off.
Order Date :- 29.04.2020 Tribhuwan/NLY/vkg