BHUPENDRA PAL SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME U.P. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/11569/2025 · 2025-09-25
Manjive Shukla
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 167531 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 167531 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 11569 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Sri M.P.Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia praying therein for the following relief:-
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to consider the case of petitioner for appointment on the post of Constable Civil Police within specific time framed by this Hon'ble Court. (ii) To pass such other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems it fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. (iii) To allow the writ petition with costs in favour of the petitioner."
3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that he had appeared in the selection process for the post of Constable Civil Police and has been selected. It has further been contended that in the application form, petitioner had duly disclosed his pending criminal cases. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for no reason, the respondents have not issued the appointment letter in favour of the petitioner, till date. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : M.P. Raju Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Bhupendra Pal Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents, on the other hand, disputes the fact that the petitioner has disclosed his pending criminal cases in the application form. 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and I find that whatsoever the position may be that as to whether, the petitioner has disclosed the pendency of criminal cases in his application form or not, the respondents are under obligation to pass a reasoned order in respect of the candidature of the petitioner. 7.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the Respondent No.3/ Chairman, U.P. Police Recruitment & Promotion Board, Lucknow, within a period of two weeks from today detailing therein his grievances and if such representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided, by passing a reasoned order within a period of one month thereafter. September 25, 2025 dk/ WRIA No. 11569 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench