Disposed

Krishna Prakash and Others v. Saurabh Singh and Others

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2024SPLAD/64/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Non-party applicants sought leave to file a special appeal against a writ court judgment granting EWS reservation benefit in recruitment, contending they would gain if pending appeals by the selection commission succeeded. The court granted leave and directed listing with connected special appeals; delay condonation objections were sought.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal granted; respondents to file objections to delay condonation within ten days; appeal to be listed with connected appeals.

Krishna Prakash and Others vs Saurabh Singh and… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

Court No. - 1

¶3

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 64 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Krishna Prakash And Others Respondent :- Saurabh Singh And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Abhinav Trivedi Counsel for Respondent :- Hemant Kumar Mishra,C.S.C.,Gaurav Mehrotra,Utsav Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

Order on C.M. Application No. 3 of 2024

¶7

Heard Sri Abhinav Narayan Trivedi learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Utsav Mishra learned counsel for the opposite party no. 5, Sri Hemant Kumar Mishra learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1 and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶8

The present intra court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the High Court Rules is preferred by non-parties to the writ proceedings and for this reason, an application seeking leave of the court to file the appeal has been filed along-with the appeal.

¶9

Notices to respondent nos. 3 and 4 have been sent through registered post as Sri Krishna Kumar Singh learned counsel who was representing the said respondents before the writ court refused to accept the same.

¶10

Leave to file the intra court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the High Court Rules is sought by the applicants/appellants

¶11

¶12

herein against the judgment dated 19.5.2023 passed in Writ A No. 26107 of 2021. The writ court while allowing the writ petition has passed an order whereby the benefit of 10% reservation to 'Economically Weaker Section' is directed to be granted in favour of as many as four candidates in separate writ petitions allowed on 19.5.2023. It is one such order passed in favour of one of the candidates which has been assailed by the applicants/appellants. Respondent no. 5(the selection commission) has already filed four special appeals separately against the four separate judgments including the one impugned herein this intra court appeal.

¶13

In the pending special appeals, four posts have been directed to be kept vacant for EWS candidates subject to the outcome of the pending appeal.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicants/appellants has submitted that the present applicants/appellants are also aggrieved against the judgment rendered by the writ court for the reason that if the special appeals stand allowed, EWS candidates would loose their right of consideration for appointment and based on the standard of merit which the applicants have secured, their right for consideration shall mature for appointment at par with general category candidates.

¶15

The validity of the income certificates submitted by the EWS candidates being questionable in the pending appeals would, in

¶16

¶17

the eventuality of success of appeals, the resultant benefit is bound to flow to the present applicants/appellants as per law. Thus, it can not be said that they are not aggrieved.

¶18

This position is not disputed by learned counsel for respondent no. 5(the selection commission) and can equally not be disputed by rest of the respondents arrayed herein.

¶19

In any case, the applicants being affected parties deserve a right of hearing in the interest of justice.

¶20

For the reasons recorded above, we hereby allow the application seeking leave to appeal.

¶21

Order on C.M. Application No. 2 of 2024

¶22

The intra court appeal is delayed by 214 days and the

¶23

same is accompanied with an application for condonation of delay duly supported with an affidavit.

¶24

Let objection against the delay condonation application be filed by the respondents within ten days.

¶25

Order on Appeal

¶26

Connect and list as fresh along with the Special Appeal No. 388 of 2023 as well as Special Appeal Defective No. 460 of 2023 and the connected appeals.

¶27

Order Date :- 6.2.2024 kanhaiya

¶28

Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Krishna Prakash and Others v. Saurabh Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Prakash and Others v. Saurabh Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Aditya Construction a Partnership Firm , Lko. U.P. Thru. Partner Sri Akhil Bansal vs Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. Lko. Thru. Managing Director

U.P.Anusuchit Jati Prathmik Vidyalay Shikshak Asstt. Lko Thru.Gen.Secy.Ramanand Vishwakarma and Anr. vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

C/M Adarsh Adyogik Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya Thru. Its Manager vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Higher Edu. Lko. and 3 Others

Lavkush Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences , Lko. Thru. Director vs M/S S.C. Agarwal Purana Qila , Lko. Thru. Proprietor Mr. S.C. Agarwal

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. /Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 6 Others