ANIKET MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND ANOTHERS
WRIA/3659/2025 · 2025-04-11
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 131770 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 131770 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20762 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3659 of 2025 Petitioner :- Aniket Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Anothers Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh K. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and Ms. Deepshikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents. 2.By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Constable of Civil Police taking into
consideration the certificate of Economically Weaker Section issued by concerned authority. 3.Learned standing counsel on the basis of written instructions which are taken on record submits that although, the petitioner had initially applied in the Economically Weaker Section category, however, the EWS certificate No.2088 dated 11.1.2024 was not on prescribed format and therefore, it was converted into general category and he was provisionally declared fit and case of the petitioner was sent to the U.P. Police Recruitment Board. The petitioner participated in the next part of selection process, i.e. physical efficiency test, in which he was declared successful. Thereafter, final result of the selection was declared on 13.3.2025, in which, he failed. It is submitted that at this stage, the relief claimed by the petitioner cannot be granted. She has also relied on judgment and order dated 18.11.2021 passed by Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.6860 of 2021 State of U.P. and others versus Pankaj Kumar in which it has been held that a line has to be drawn at some stage as otherwise, the recruitment process undertaken by the competent authorities would be meaningless without a time line and the next recruitment process will also get effected since determination of the number of vacancies for the next process will keep fluctuating. She has also relied on a judgment dated 15.2.2022 of Supreme Court in Shankar Mandal versus State of West Bengal and others Civil Appeal No.1924 of 2010 wherein it has been held that in a recruitment process, a candidate cannot be permitted to approach for redressal, however, may be the genuineness of he grievance, at any stage of time as here has to be a closure to the process of recruitment. It is submitted that the final selection result has been declared on 13.3.2025. The select list has been sent to the Director General of Police, U.P. Lucknow who is the head of department and as such, no mandamus as sought by the petitioner can be granted in this petition. 4.On due consideration to the submission made and the written instructions as well as the judgments referred to above, this Court finds that the selection process has already been completed and the select list has been submitted to the head of department, i.e. the Director General of Police by the Recruitment Board and at this stage, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be granted.
The submission advanced by learned Chief
Standing Counsel thus carries force. 5.The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.4.2025 kkb/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench