- (1.) HEARD Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the opposite par­ties as well as Sri O.P. Srivastava, Advocate, who is present for the opposite party No.5.
(2.) THE petitioner has filed this writ peti­tion against the rejection of the representa­tion vide order dated 8-4-09. The case of the petitioner is that he is 50% handicapped and is being sent for the election duty. In this re­gard he is claiming exemption under a letter, which has been written by Additional Super­intendent of Police, Economic Offence Wing, U.P., Lucknow vide his order dated 12-3-09 in Clause-I of this letter only this much is written that such officials should be sent to the election duty, who are otherwise, healthy and competent. The petitioner submits that he is physically handicapped and his right eye was injured in the year 1999, as given in Para 8 of the writ petition. The learned Standing counsel has pointed out, that since 1999, the petitioner has been working in the department and the medical certificate has been obtained by him only on 10.03.09 and it is only for the purposes of not going for the election duty that this medi­cal certificate has been submitted. There is no mention in the writ petition that the peti­tioner ever claimed any benefit under the vi­sually handicapped person. Since 1999 the pe­titioner has been performing every other duty without any difficulty.
(3.) THE case of the petitioner is that certain other-persons have been exempted from be­ing sent to the election duty and the petitioner is being discriminated by the opposite par­ties and has been directed to go for the elec­tion duty.;