REENA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. OF MEDICAL,HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
SPLAD/29/2025 · 2025-02-10
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 120046 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 120046 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8302-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 29 of 2025 Appellant :- Reena Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Of Medical,Health And Family Welfare Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Lalta Prasad Misra,Shashank Shekhar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Puneet Chandra Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
Order on C.M. Application No.1 of 2025
1. The appeal has been filed with reported delay of 160 days. It is accompanied with an application for condonation of delay.
2. The cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of an application for condonation of delay is sufficient.
3. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Order on Appeal
4. Heard Dr. L.P. Mishra, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Sri Indrajeet Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of opposite party nos.1 and 2. Sri Puneet Chandra, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.3.
5. In the present case the rule applicable to the appellant, who was inducted for four months Certificate training in Community Health for Nurses (CCHN), reads as under:-
"(2) Salary and performance based incentive:- 1.----- 2.----- 3.----- 4.-----
5.-----
6. Candidates will have maximum one additional attempt to pass the course in upcoming session."
6. It is not in dispute that two opportunities have been availed of by the present appellant but she could not qualify in the examination for grant of the certificate.
7. Rules of a qualifying examination are binding.
8. The writ court having appreciated the Rule and its sanctity has thus declined to interfere in exercise of writ jurisdiction as a result whereof, the present intra-court appeal has come up before us at the instance of the appellant-petitioner assailing the said judgement.
9. Once the rule applicable to the appellant is clear, we do not find any fault in the judgement/order passed by the writ court calling for an interference in exercise of the appellate power under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.
10. The appeal bereft of any merit is accordingly dismissed. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.)
Order Date :- 10.02.2025 Shahnaz Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench