Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 159874 (ALL)

SATENDRA KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. APPOINTMENT LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/9835/2025 · 2025-09-02

Manish Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 9835 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State counsel for opposite parties no.1, 4 & 5 while power on behalf of opposite party no.2 & 3 has been filed by Ms. Maria Fatima, Advocate, which is taken on record. 2. Petition has been filed seeking quashing of result dated 28.07.2025 with regard to appointment on the post of Cinema Operator against SC/ST seats pursuant to advertisement 23- Exam/2016. Further prayer for appointment of petitioner on the said post has also been made. 3. Primary gist of submissions of learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner has been incorrectly excluded from the select list although he obtained more marks than the last selected candidate. 4. Learned counsel for opposite parties no.2 & 3 however has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with the submission that there is no arbitrariness in publishing of the select list since persons have been selected in order of merit. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material available on record, it is evident that petitioner has not been able to substantiate by any documentary evidence the aspect that he obtained more marks than the last Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mayank Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Satendra Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Appointment Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) selected candidate. 6. In such circumstances, it could have been open for the petitioner to obtain necessary documents through the means available and then only to present the petition before this Court with all the relevant documents. 7. In case such documents are available with the petitioner subsequently, he shall have a right to approach this Court again with all the relevant pleadings and evidence on record. 8. With the aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of. September 2, 2025 Subodh/- WRIA No. 9835 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench