Dismissed

Aseem Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 May 2024WRIC/4589/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an unsuccessful PhD aspirant from the University of Lucknow, challenged the admission list and sought an interview and exam papers. The Court held that since the petitioner had moved an RTI application and respondent institutions had already facilitated his interview where he did not qualify, the petition became infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; no further directions issued as petitioner pursued RTI and interview already held.

Aseem Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45851

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4589 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Aseem Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Savitra Vardhan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite parties no.2 and 3, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Aseem Kumar Pandy, petitioner, in person, as well as Shri Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents no.2 and 3.

¶8

It has been submitted by the petitioner, in person, that he had appeared in the entrance examination for Ph.D. in Law from the University of Lucknow which was held on 25.02.2024. The grievance of the petitioner was that despite being in the list of qualified candidates, he was not called for interview and consequently, he has approached this Court by means of the present writ petition seeking a direction to set aside the final list of candidates released after interview to the admission for Ph.D. (Law) of the University of Lucknow, and further a direction to the opposite parties to call the petitioner for interview and to provide the Questions Paper and Answer Key of the petitioner's entrance exam of the Ph.D. (Law).

¶9

Shri Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3, on the basis of instructions, informs this Court that pursuant to the direction of this Court dated 23.05.2024, the petitioner has already been called for the

¶10

interview and merit list has already been declared where the petitioner could not qualify as the qualified candidates have secured more marks than the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer no.2 stands satisfied.

¶11

The challenge with regard to the selection was made only on account of Clause 5.2.4 of the Ph.D. Ordinance, 2023 and specific Clause (b) where EWS candidates were required to secure at least 45% marks in Research Entrance Test (RET). Considering the fact that University has acceded to the request of the petitioner and permitted him to appear in interview, the challenge to the selection also no longer exists.

¶12

With regard to the prayer no.3 for direction to the opposite parties to provide Question Paper and Answer Key, it is submitted by the petitioner himself that he has moved an application under Right to Information Act. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that once the petitioner has taken recourse to a statutory remedy, he is at liberty to proceed further with the said proceedings in accordance with law and during pendency of the said proceedings, no direction further direction sought by the petitioner can be issued.

¶13

In light of the above, specially considering the fact that the petitioner has already been called for interview and the list of selected candidates has been declared and no further direction as sought by the petitioner can be passed in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is rendered infructuous and is dismissed as such.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.7.2024 KR

¶15

(Alok Mathur,J.)

¶16

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

Aseem Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aseem Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Vs Ayush Kumar and 6 Others

Bhanwareshwar Verma Vs Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Mahesh Malunjkar

Shri Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Fakira Vs Deputy Driector of Consolidation Sitapur and Others

Smt. Ram Dulari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Ganesh Shankar Mishra Vs Virendra Chaturvedi and Another