SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 98085

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD


Anuradha .....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s)


Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Srivastava, Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot, Rajesh Mishra

Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mahendra Narain Singh


Court No. - 52


HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.


(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)


October 8, 2026


R ahul.DRH iAi g gHi h ta UC llLy o uGs r iOg t n oSe fW d Ju Ab dMy ic I: a - ture at Allahabad

Advocates:
Petitioner: Abhishek Srivastava , Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot and Rajesh Mishra
Respondent: C.S.C. and Mahendra Narain Singh

1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B.K.S. Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondent no. 2 to accept the hard copy of the application form, along with the relevant documents submitted by the petitioner, and not to proceed with the interview pursuant to Advertisement dated 18.08.2026, bearing Advertisement No. D-1/E-1/2026.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that applications were invited from eligible candidates for appointment to various posts under the Medical Education Department pursuant to the advertisement dated 18.08.2026. The online application process commenced on 18.08.2026, and the last date for submission of online applications along with payment of the prescribed fee was 01.09.2026. The facility for correction in the application form remained available up to 08.09.2026, whereas the last date and time for submission of the hard copy of the online application form along with the requisite documents was fixed as 15.09.2026 up to 5:00 p.m.

4. It is further submitted that the posts advertised are to be filled exclusively on the basis of interview. The petitioner, being fully eligible for the post in question, duly submitted his online application and deposited the requisite online fee on 31.08.2026, well within the prescribed period. As required under the advertisement, the petitioner duly dispatched the downloaded hard copy of his online application, along with the requisite supporting documents, by registered post on 08.09.2026. The postal article reached the hours.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the aforesaid facts are borne out from the postal tracking report annexed at page 62 of the writ petition. The hard copy of the online application form along with the requisite documents reached the office of respondent no. 2 at Allahabad on 16.09.2026 at about 16:49:36 hours. However, the envelope containing the said documents was refused to be accepted by the respondent Commission, and the endorsement “Refused to Accept” was accordingly made thereon. The said envelope was thereafter returned and delivered to the petitioner on21.09.2026 at about 17:56:58 hours.

6. It is further submitted that, upon noticing the aforesaid delay, the petitioner approached the postal authorities to ascertain the circumstances which had occasioned the delay in delivery of the article. The petitioner was informed that, on account of the 18th BRICS Leaders’ Summit held in Delhi, the offices situated in Delhi/New Delhi were closed pursuant to the written order dated 07.09.2026. It is further submitted that, by Office Memorandum dated 03.09.2026 issued by the Director, JCA, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India, the offices situated in Delhi/New Delhi were declared closed from Friday, 11.09.2026 to13.09.2026.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, immediately thereafter, approached respondent no. 2 and submitted a written representation dated 30.09.2026, setting out the aforesaid facts and requesting acceptance of the hard copy of his online application form along with the requisite documents. A copy of the said representation has been annexed with the writ petition. However, no action has been taken by the respondent authorities thereon till date.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no deliberate or wilful delay on the part of the petitioner. The petitioner had duly submitted his online application and deposited the requisite fee within the prescribed period, and had also taken timely steps for dispatch of the hard copy of the application form along with the requisite documents. The subsequent delay in delivery was occasioned by circumstances attributable to the postal authorities and was wholly beyond the petitioner's control. It is thus urged that the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top