Disposed¶18

Anil Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2023WRIA/19265/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compassionate appointment; Physical Efficiency Test failure; Constable recruitment; dependent of deceased employee; adjustment against another/lower post; fresh application window; Government Order dated 18.09.2015 para 5; three-month fresh application period; four-week application direction; offer within 30 days; Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P., Writ A No. 16436 of 2022; Allahabad High Court; Writ - A No. 19265 of 2023; disposed of 21.11.2023.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with directions that the petitioners may apply afresh within four weeks for any other post in the police department; the application is to be considered per the Government Order dated 18.09.2015 and, if found entitled, the post is to be offered within 30 days of the authority's decision. ¶18

Anil Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who failed the Physical Efficiency Test for compassionate appointment as Constable, is entitled to be adjusted/offered another post in the police department in terms of the Government Order dated 18.09.2015.

¶7

Court's answer

Since the petitioner failed the physical efficiency test for the post of Constable, it remains open to the petitioners to apply afresh for any other post in the police department for which they may be offered appointment as per their eligibility.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioners make an application within four weeks, it shall be considered and disposed of in the light of the provisions of the Government Order dated 18.09.2015.

¶17

Key takeaways

If the petitioners are held entitled to any other post, the post shall be offered within 30 days from the date of the authority's decision.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Ajit Kumar, J.) disposed of a writ petition by a candidate who had sought appointment on compassionate ground as Constable but failed the Physical Efficiency Test. Learned counsel for the petitioner had sought the benefit granted in Jitendra Singh and another v. State of U.P. and 3 others, Writ A No. 16436 of 2022. The Court, noting the Government Order dated 18.09.2015 (para 5 of the instructions reproduced therein), directed that it remains open to the petitioners to apply afresh for any other post in the police department as per their eligibility; an application made within four weeks was to be considered and disposed of in light of that Government Order, and if held entitled to any other post, the offer was to be made within 30 days of the authority's decision.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:220790

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19265 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Anil Kumar And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- CSC

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Vijay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel.

¶7

Petitioner sought appointment on compassionate ground as Constable as he is intermediate qualified. However, in the he could not qualify in the Physical Efficiency Test.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is entitled to the benefit as given by this Court in the case of Jitendra Singh and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others, Writ A No. 16436 of 2022.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel submits that in the above regard he has obtained instructions and in view of the provisions as contained under the Government Order dated 18.09.2015 petitioner can be adjusted against any other post, if he applies afresh within three months. The provision as contained in para 5 of the instructions is reproduced hereunder:

¶10

“5- यह ककि ्ቚश्नगत भतቔኍ शशासनशाददेश कदनशककिततः ा 18.09.2015 किदे ्ቚशावधशानोሪ किदे अन्तगरत

¶11

साሪप्ቐ किकी गययी थयी, जजिसकिदे ्ቚस्तर-2(5) मम कनम्नवत ्ቚशावधशान हहतः-

¶12

“ककिसयी भयी पद पर ममृत पपुजलिस किमቔኍ किदे आजቦኌत किदे रूप मम भतቔኍ हदेतपु ककिसयी भयी अभ्यथቔኍ किक कनयमशानपुसशार एकि हयी अवसर ्ቚदशान ककियशा जिशायदेगशा, अगर वह इस हदेतपु ्ቚदशान ककियदे गयदे अवसर मम ककिसयी भयी किशारण सदे, उस पद किदे जलिए कनधशा र रत ्ቚकቅኌयशानपुसशार सदेवशायकजिन पशानदे मम असफलि

¶13

रहतशा हह, तक उसदे ककिसयी कनम्न पद पर सदेवशायकजिन हदेतपु ऑफर कदयशा जिशायदेगशा और वह यकद 03

¶14

मशाह किदे अन्दर अन्य ककिसयी पद पर सदेवशायकजिन हदेतपु आव द ेन नहीሻ किरतशा हह , तक यह समझशा

¶15

जिशायदेगशा ककि वह पपुजलिस कवभशाग मम ककिसयी भयी पद पर सदेवशायकजिन पशानदे किशा इच्छपुकि नहीሻ हह।”

¶16

In view of the above, it is hereby provided that since the petitioner has failed in physical efficiency test for the post of Constable, it will remain open for the petitioners to apply afresh for any other post in the police department which may be offered to him as per their eligibility.

¶17

It is accordingly provided that in the event petitioners make an application within four weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of in the light of provisions as contained under the Government Order dated 18.09.2015 and quoted herein above. Petitioners, if held entitled for any other post, the same shall be offered within 30 days from the date of decision to be taken by the authority.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of .

¶19

Order Date :- 21.11.2023 IrfanUddin

¶20

Digitally signed by :- IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharad Srivastava Vs the State of U.P. and 4 Others

Wahid Hussain Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Girish Chandra Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Usman Kausar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shyam Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dharmenra Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others