Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116242 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9549 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sharad Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arunesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution petitioner has assailed the arbitrary approach of the respondent No. 5 in not intimating the petitioner the date and time of interview for the purposes of selection and appointment of Technical Manager advertised by the respondent to be filled up through manpower provided by outsourced service provider agency in terms of Government Order dated 29.03.2025. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the respondent No. 5 was selected to provide manpower for the post in question and petitioner being registered with the district employment office, was on the roll of the respondent No. 5 and his name figured in the final list prepared of the candidates to be called for inverview. The list containing the name of the petitioner has been brought on record as annexure No. 5 to the petitioner. The submission is that for the foul play of respondent No. 5 in not informing the date of interview, petitioner could not participate in the interview conducted for selection on the post of Assistant Technical Manager even though he fulfiled all the requisite eligibility criteria. It is next submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner has raised his grievance with the respondent No. 2 by making representation on 03.07.2025 copy whereof has been brought on record as annexure No. 6 to the petition. 4. Learned Standing Counsel however submits that petitioner has the main grievance against respondent No.5 which is the outsourced agency and, therefore, he may not maintain this petition but upon pointed query being made as to how the selection is made, learned Standing Counsel would not dispute that the selection is made after interviewing each candidate by the Government Authority. 5. In such above view of the matter, in my considered view, it is the obligation cast upon the state authority to ensure that while selection is held through outsourced service provider agency, the service provider agency does not do any foul play and, therefore, if a candidate raises grievance more especially when a candidate is registered with the District Employment Exchange his grievance should be addressed properly. 6. Accordingly, I dispose of this petition with the direction to the petitioner to make a fresh representation within a period of four weeks to the respondent No. 2 along with certified copy of this order who shall look into, consider the same and dispose of the same in accordance with law by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Nadeem Digitally signed by :- IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad