ABHISHEK KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Abhishek Kumar And Others
State of Uttarakhand and others
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the entire select list for recruitment of Constable and further asked for a direction for preparation of fresh select list including the name of petitioners.
(2.) The short fact of the case is that the State respondents issued an advertisement inviting application for filling up post of Police Constable by direct recruitment drive. In the advertisement, there has been mention for reservation in the manner as follows:-
Scheduled castes - 19%
Scheduled Tribes - 4%
Other backward classes - 14%
(3.) The candidates from existing Home Guard are given status of reserved category. In terms of the Government Order issued in 1994-95, 05% has been reserved for Home Guard. The other reservations are not relevant in this case. The Petitioners and each of them pursuant to this advertisement, applied in Home Guard category mentioning their caste as O.B.C. Of course, the petitioners have not stated this fact in the writ petition but when counter affidavit was filed, it was mentioned that the petitioners have not applied for Home Guard simplicitor and also have tried to take advantage of O.B.C. category, and this assertion of the counter affidavit has not been denied in the affidavit of rejoinder. In course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners admits this factual position. The petitioners participated in the selection process and were declared unsuccessful. The petitioners thereafter collected the marks obtained therein as well as the persons being the private respondents herein who have been selected. It is undisputed that private respondent Nos. 4 to 10 are also Home Guards and they also participated in the selection process claiming themselves to be a general category and also other category. After downloading of the results of the petitioners as well as the aforesaid respondents, it appears that the petitioners secured higher marks than the respondents who were selected.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.