Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

OM PRAKASH SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Om Prakash Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. - 55357 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 15875 (21 September 2007)

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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Court No. 33

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 55357 of 2006

Om Prakash Singh

Versus

State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla, J.

Present writ petition has been filed by petitioner, requesting therein that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear in Counselling in B. Ed. admission.

Petitioner undertook entrance test for getting admission in B. Ed. course as OBC category candidate; he secured 286 marks. In the result petitioner has not succeeded, as he was described to be candidate from other State. Under OBC category quota, candidate who had secured 269 marks, had succeeded in getting admission to B. Ed. course. In this background, petitioner approached this Court. This Court on 11.10.2006 passed following order:

"The petitioner claims to be duly selected for admission in B. Ed. course 2006-07 but he has not been called for counseling which is to begin from 13.10.2006.

On 6.10.2006 learned counsel for respondent-University was granted time to seek instructions. He has made a statement that the petitioner has not been found eligible for counseling because in the record of the respondent-University, petitioner is shown to be resident of outside the State of U.P. The petitioner submits that he resides in district Varanasi and also produced certificate to that effect which has been annexed with this writ petition.

In the aforesaid circumstances, it is directed that the Respondent-University shall permit the petitioner to appear for counseling to admission in B. Ed. course 2006-07 which is commence from 13.10.2006 and the petitioner may be granted provisional admission, which shall be subject to the final orders passed in this writ petition.

As prayed by learned counsel for respondents, list on 24.1.2006 by which date they may file counter affidavit.

Let a certified copy of this order be given to learned counsel for the petitioner by today on payment of usual charge."

Pursuant to order passed by this Court counselling was held and petitioner has been accorded admission and has been perusing B. Ed. course 2006-07. From the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent-University, it is revealed that in the answer sheet at the time of Entrance Test in column No. 4, where it had to be filled up as to whether the candidate is of State of U.P. or not, petitioner has filled up "No" and on checking being made by Computer, petitioner's result under OBC category quota has not been declared.

In the rejoinder affidavit qua the statement of facts mentioned in the counter affidavit, it has been mentioned that on the instruction of invigilator said column in question was filled up as "No", otherwise the petitioner is permanent resident of district Varanasi. In view of this statement, learned counsel for respondent-University was asked to produce petitioner's original application form. To day on the matter being taken up, Xerox copy of the same has been filed along with the affidavit. A perusal of petitioner's original application form indicates that nowhere petitioner has claimed himself to be resident of out side State of U.P. In Column No.18, categorical details have been given in respect of petitioner's residence of district Varanasi.

After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which emerges is to the effect that petitioner had applied for admission to B. Ed. course as OBC category candidate; and at the time of filling original application form, nowhere he had claimed to be resident of outside State of U.P. Petitioner's candidature has to be treated in the context of application moved by him, but his result has been declared in the context of declaration made by him in his answer sheet, which was made by him, as petitioner states, under some wrong impression on the instruction of invigilator. It is true that in the present case, petitioner in column No. 4 of the answer sheet had mentioned "No" which meant that he was a candidate out side the State of U.P. but facts clearly indicate that he is not at all resident of outside State of U.P., rather he is resident of State of U.P. Terms and conditions of admission clearly mention that in case candidate has not appended certificate in respect of out side State resident, then the said benefit will not be extended. Admittedly, petitioner has not claimed himself to be resident outside of State of U.P. in his application form nor had he annexed any certificate in that regard. In these circumstances and in this background, merely on account of wrong filling in answer sheet, petitioner cannot be deprived of his legitimate claim of being resident of State of U.P. As per directives already issued by this Court, petitioner was permitted to appear in counselling and he has even been accorded admission provisionally, as such there is no legal impediment in pursuing B. Ed. course by petitioner.

Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are directed to, treat the petitioner's candidature as final instead of provisional, and permit him to appear in examination and declare his results also accordingly.

21.09.2007

SRY


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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