HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 399 of 2025 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 02.05.2025 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. 2. The petition was filed seeking a direction to the respondents to accord appointment to the petitioner on the post of Constable (Civil Police) in the U.P. Police Recruitment, 2023 under the general category claiming benefit as a dependent of freedom fighter. 3. Learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that as the appellant had failed to secure the required merit, he was not entitled to any relief and consequently, the petition was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved, the present appeal was filed. 4. In the appeal, plea was raised that the respondents have not provided sufficient posts as per the 2% reservation provided for the dependents of a freedom fighter and therefore, on providing requisite reservation the appellant would be entitled to relief. 5. The Division Bench required the respondents to file a short affidavit, which has been filed. It has been indicated that the cutoff in appellant's category was 93.44588 whereas appellant had obtained 79.66037 marks and as such, he could not appear in the merit list. Further indications have been made that 2% reservation in terms of judgments in Deependra Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Umakant Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Nishant Shukla (A.C.S.C.) Mohit Kumar Mishra .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 2 others .....Respondent(s) Yadav and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others : Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5817 of 2023 and Saurabh Yadav and others Vs. State of U.P. and others : Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 23223 of 2018, decided on 18.12.2020 has been provided, wherein out of 60244 advertised posts, 1204 posts are reserved for the category. 6. We have considered the submissions and have perused the material available on record. 7. Both the issues, as raised by the appellant, have been categorically answered by the short counter affidavit filed by the respondents i.e. pertaining to the marks obtained by the appellant being less than the cutoff and reservation having been provided in terms of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8. In view thereof, no case for interference is made out in the appeal, the same is, therefore, dismissed. November 20, 2025 Mukesh Pal/Asheesh SPLAD No. 399 of 2025 2 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench