Court No. - 40

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 114 of 2023

Appellant :- Rameshwar

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others

Counsel for Appellant :- Shikher Trivedi,Durvesh Kumar

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Order on Civil Misc. Delay Condonation

Application No. 1 of 2023.

The delay in filing the appeal has been explained in

the affidavit.

Cause shown is found sufficient.

Delay is condoned.

Application is allowed.

Order on Appeal.

1. Heard Shri Shikher Trivedi, learned counsel for the

appellant, Shri Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing

Counsel for the State respondents.

2. The Special Appeal is questioning the validity of

the impugned judgment and order dated 05.08.2022

passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ

Petition No. 11467 of 2022 (Rameshwar versus State

of U.P. and others) and further prayed that the

respondent be directed to accept the claim of the

petitioner for appointment in the O.B.C. category in

accordance with law during the pendency of this

Special Appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant in support of his

submission states that while passing the order

learned Single Judge has erred and has not

considered the Full Bench Judgement of this Court

rendered in a bunch of matters, leading being

Special Appeal No. 156 of 2017-Gaurav Sharma

versus State of U.P. Thru Secy. and 3 Others,

2017 AIR (Allahabad) 116.

4. He submits that in the similar facts and

circumstances, the learned Single Judge in Writ A No.

4689 of 2022 (Rinki Yadav versus State of U.P. Thru.

Addl Chief Secy. Home (Police) Anubhag-6 Lko. And 3

Others) wherein she was working on the post of

Constable and was a candidate for selection to the

post of Sub Inspector (Civil Police) Platoon

Commander (PAC) and Second Officer in Fire Brigade

in pursuance to the Advertisement issued in

February, 2021 her candidature was rejected by the

respondent that the selection mode is considering

the candidature of the petitioner under the General

Category rather than treating her under O.B.C.

Category, allowed the similar prayer of the petitioner

as prayed in the instant petition.

5. The Rinki Yadav (supra) has challenged the said

action in the aforementioned Writ Petition where the

learned Single Judge vide order dated 09.09.2022

had allowed the writ petition and directed the

respondents to accept the O.B.C. Certificate

submitted by the petitioner and proceeded with the

process of selection of the petitioner on the post of

Sub Inspector (Civil Police). He submits that the said

order was subject matter of the Special Appeal

Defective No. 274 of 2022 (State of U.P. versus

Rinki Yadav 2022 Law Suit (All) 1900.

6. The present Intra Court Appeal has been filed

under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of Court with the prayer to

quash & set aside the judgment dated 05.08.2022

passed by learned Single Judge and further direct the

State authorities, specifically Uttar Pradesh Police

Recruitment and Promotion Board (hereinafter

referred as the "Recruitment and Promotion Board")

to declare his result treating his candidature

belonging to Other Backward Class category, The

cause of action arises in favour of the Appellant-

Petitioner for filing the writ petition when his result

has not been declared in the select list even after

securing higher marks than the lowest cut-off marks

in the O.B.C. category. The learned Single Judge

while deciding the petition preferred by the

Appellant-Petitioner dismissed the same on the

ground that firstly he could not produce the O.B.C.

certificate on prescribed format within the time as

specified in the advertisement, and thereafter he

warranted O.B.C. certificate submitted by the

Appellant-Petitioner at highly belated stage.

7. The Recruitment and Promotion Board issued an

advertisement in the mont