1 2025:CGHC:48204 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10981 of 2025 1. Vandana D/o Dr. Jawahar Lal Upadhyay Aged About 37 Years Category - Unreserved, R/o A-402, Madhusudan Homes, Jail Road, P.O. Gita Vatika, Gorakhpur, District - Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh (Pin - 273006) ... Petitioner versus 1. Union Of India Through Its Director General Postal Services Department Of Post, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi 110001 2. Pt. Ravi Shankar Shukla University Raipur Through Its Registrar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. Solicitor General For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Neeraj Dubey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 19.09.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the non-opening of the envelope sent by the petitioner or refusing to accept the application submitted by the petitioner through speed post on 11.01.2025 from MBC Gorakhpur RMS Branch Gorakhpur Pt. Ravi Shankar Shukla MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2025.09.25 11:55:00 +0530 2 University Raipur for selection procedure for appointment on the post of Assistant Professor(English). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the advertisement dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P/1) the last date of submission of application form was 15.01.2025 as per the Clause 2 of the General Conditions enumerated. He would further submit that as per the advertisement the application form has to be sent by registered post/speed post only and accordingly as per clause enumerated in the advertisement no other mode is permissible for sending the application. He would further submit that the petitioner has sent his form on 11.01.2025 at 05:05 PM and it has been received by the respondent No. 2/University on 21.01.2025 at 01:00 PM, therefore, respondent No. 2 has refused to accept the same. He would further submit that according to the Postal Services Rules as amended on 10.12.2013, the speed post should be served within 4 days from the date of booking of article to the destination other than the entire country except within the local municipalities or between one and other metro city and another metro cities. Thus, he would submit that within time frame he has done his duty, therefore, he has not responsible for delay caused by the inaction of the Postal Department and to substantiate his submission he has referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ashutosh Agnihotri vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2017 (4) SCT 539. He would further submit that he has already made representation to the respondent No. 2/University for considering his case. 3 3. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/University opposing the submission would submit that the petitioner himself responsible for delay and according to the Clause 2 of the advertisement General Conditions enumerated in the advertisement, the respondent University cannot be held responsible for delay caused by postal services. Thus, the action taken by the respondent University in not taking the postal article i.e. application form of the petitioner is legal, justified and he would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the 5. Considering the submission made by the parties and also considering the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ashutosh Agnihotri (supra), looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, respondent University is directed to decide the representation (Annexure P/5) filed by the petitioner within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order if the result is not finalized by the respondent University in the English Subject. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Manish