Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80019-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 344 of 2025 Appellant :- Archana Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Kuber Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J. (Order on Delay Condonation Application) Heard. Cause shown for the delay in filing the special appeal is to the satisfaction of the Court. The delay in filing of the special appeal is condoned. The delay condonation application is, accordingly, allowed. (Order on Special Appeal) This special appeal arises out of an order passed by learned Single Judge dated 18.03.2025 passed in Writ-A No. 20825 of 2024, whereby, the writ petition itself has been dismissed. The petitioner had applied for appointment to the post of constable in U.P. Police. She belongs to OBC (female) category. Grievance of the petitioner before the learned Single Judge was that though she has secured marks above the cut off yet she has not been selected. Learned Single Judge has directed the concerned officials to produce the cut off marks in respect of distinct category of candidates. In OBC (female) candidate, the last cut off marks in OBC (female) category is 189.39259 normalization marks, whereas, the marks secured by the appellant is only 148.62803 normalization marks. Since the candidates running into lacks had participated and the examination was conducted in different shifts, the process of normalization was inevitable. The writ petition has been dismissed after holding that the appellant has not been able to secure marks above the cut off marks of her category. Learned Single Judge has noticed that every candidate was furnished carbon copy of the OMR sheet which has not been annexed alongwith the writ petition. The submission that no such carbon copy was provided is rightly disbelieved once the standard procedure of examination was such as per which candidates were given carbon copy of the OMR sheet. The appellant's contention that she has scored 248 marks is otherwise not found correct. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the authorities. Though various submissions are made but the finding returned by learned Single Judge that appellant has not been able to secure marks above the cut off is not disputed. Once that be so, we do not find any occasion to interfere in the present appeal which consequently fails and is dismissed. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 K.K. Maurya Digitally signed by :- KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad