Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Kaushal Kumar Singh And Another v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 10895 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 4577 (27 February 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.30

Civil Misc. Writ petition No.10895 of 2006

          Kaushal Kumar Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.C.Misra,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel for the respondents and perused the record. On the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed off at the admission stage in terms of the Rules of the Court, 1952.

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to conduct counseling of the petitioners forthwith and send the petitioners for training in the Special B.T.C. Course immediately.  

The petitioners applied for the special B.T.C. training to be given to the candidates having B.Ed. Degree to their credit under the General Male category in the Arts Group, being fully qualified they submitted their academic records the quality point marks of petitioner no.1- Kaushal Kumar Singh was 310.33 and petitioner no.2- Sanjay Kumar Rai obtained 310.19.  The names of the petitioners were not found in the first list, which disclosed the names of selected candidates. In the second list also the petitioners' names were not found there.  It has been stated that the last person, who has been selected had obtained 309.90 quality point marks, which was lesser than the quality point marks of both the petitioners.

The petitioners approached respondent no.2 and submitted their representations, which remain undecided. In this respect petitioners filed several reminders to the respondents but they did not take any action. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this court through a writ petition.

Under the above facts and circumstances of case, the respondent no.2 is directed to dispose off the representations of the petitioners pending before it expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

With this direction, the writ petition is disposed off.  No order as to costs.

pkc/3/Dated: 27.2.2006



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.