Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 92488 (ALL)

YOGESH KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/13307/2025 · 2025-09-08

Mayur Jain Jt Registrar J Listing

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 13307 of 2025 Court No. - 32 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking for the following relief:- " i) to issue a writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to disclose the marks obtained by the petitioner in the written examination; ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the pending representation dated 13.8.2025 and 18.8.2025 (Annexure 6 & 7 respectively) before the respondent No.2; " 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner without entering into the merits of the case made innocuous prayer that he may be permitted to file fresh representation before respondent no.2 and a direction may be issued to him to decide the same in time bound manner. 3. Sri Siddharth Singhal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 and 3 vehemently opposed the petition on merit, but has not opposed the prayer as made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri Siddharth Singhal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 and 3 and Sri R. P. Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State- Respondent and perused the contents made in the writ petition. 5. Without entering into merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner as no objection made by learned counsel for the respondents. Petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation along with the present writ petition and certified copy of this order before respondent no.2 Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Astha Misra, Avneesh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Siddharth Singhal Yogesh Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Selection Commission, Lucknow within 3 days. After receiving the said representation, the respondent no.2 is directed to decide the said representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation. 6. With the aforesaid directions/observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. September 9, 2025 AKT WRIA No. 13307 of 2025 2 (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad