Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50694 (ALL)

ANJU RANI WIDOW AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

WRIA/5708/2025 · 2025-07-02

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103432 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5708 of 2025 Petitioner :- Anju Rani Widow And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Adarsh Bhushan, Aditya Bhushan Singhal,Archit Mandhyan,C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Chandra Pal Singh, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 8. 2. It is not under much dispute that all petitioners were appointed on compassionate ground on Class III post and also that they were required to pass typing test, within period of one year from their respective appointment and in case of failure, they could be appointed fresh on a class IV post. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioners submits that all petitioners have under gone typing test earlier on two occasion, however, they all failed and accordingly, impugned order was passed whereby, they were appointed fresh on a class IV post. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioners refers a communication dated 27.01.2025 that a decision was taken to take a fresh typing test for all petitioners and a typing test schedule was also proposed, however, same could not take place due to unknown reason and prays that a chance be given to them to undergo a fresh typing test and on basis of its outcome legal consequence shall follow. 5. Learned counsel for respondents submits that condition were specifically described in respective appointment letter of petitioners that they have to pass typing test within one year, however, they failed on two occasions. 6. Leaned counsel for respondent has not able to dispute and also referred subsequent event of a decision to hold a fresh typing test. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, since a decision was taken by concerned respondent that petitioners may go for a fresh typing test, therefore, the Court is of the view that since the appointments are on basis of compassionate ground, therefore, a chance will be given to petitioners to participate in the typing test being a last chance for petitioners. A date for typing test be fixed within three months. The impugned order will be subject to outcome of fresh typing test. 8. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad