Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DR. MADHU RANA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dr. Madhu Rana v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. - 52252 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 16868 (25 October 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

Hon'ble R.K. Agarwal, J.

Hon'ble S.P.Mehrotra, J.

The learned Standing Counsel represented on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Pushpendra Singh represented on behalf of the respondent No. 3 pray for and are granted three weeks' time to obtain instructions and to file Counter Affidavits.

List before the appropriate Bench on 3rd December, 2007.

The contention of the petitioner is that she was married on 27-4-2003 at Varanasi with Dr. Bhola Nath Maurya and the marriage was also registered under the Hindu Marriage Act in Volume 11 on pages 625/630 at Serial No. 105/03 at Allahabad, as per the Certificate dated 1-7-2003.

She belonged to Koeri sub caste which has been mentioned at Serial No.7 of Schedule 1 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 and after her marriage, even the caste of Koeri is also mentioned at Serial No. 3 of Schedule I of the aforesaid Act. At the time of Interview, she had filed Certificates issued by both the States - Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh which have been rejected on the ground that the benefit of reservation is available to the resident of Uttar Pradesh and therefore, her interview cannot be taken.

After marriage, she has become resident of Uttar Pradesh and, therefore, U.P. Public Services Commission was not justified to decline to take interview.

In view of the above, we direct that the respondent No. 3 shall call the petitioner for the interview but her result shall not be declared without leave of the Court.

Dt.25-10-2007/AK/L

C.M.W.P.No.52252 of 07


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.