Arvind Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajit Kumar, J.
1. Heard Sri Ankur Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Siddharth Singhal, learned counsel for the respondent No.-4 and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 through video conferencing. Nobody is present on behalf of the respondent No.3.
2. The petitioners who are four in number, are before this Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the notification issued by the respondent No.4, namely, U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission, impleaded through its Secretary, dated 11th November, 2021 whereby the applicants under the Advertisement No.-20(07)/2015 and 16(04)/2016 have been directed to apply for appearing in the written examination for selection and appointment to the post of Instructors that are 559 and 293 respectively under the advertisements, to be filled in.
3. The petitioners who have applied against two advertisements respectively, have questioned the notification on the ground that at the time of advertisements in the year 2015 and 2016 prescribing last date for submission of applications as 24th November, 2015 and 21st December, 2016 respectively, the rules in existence were The Uttar Pradesh Industrial Training
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.