Disposed

Dharmendra Kumar Diwaker v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2025WRIA/14698/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A candidate's selection to Civil Police Constable was cancelled due to an FIR against one Dharmendra Kumar. The court found the impugned order did not examine whether the accused was the petitioner or another person of the same name, set aside the order and remitted for fresh decision within two months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 31.07.2025 cancelling candidature set aside; matter remitted for fresh order after verification, within two months.

Dharmendra Kumar Diwaker vs State of U.P. and 5… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 14698 of 2025

¶3

Dharmendra Kumar Diwaker

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 5 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Anil Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 34

¶10

HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

¶11

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents.

¶12

This court entertained this petition on 25.09.2025 while directing the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions and thereafter the matter was fixed for today. Instructions have been supplied by Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief learned Standing Counsel, submits that she is well equipped with the instructions and the instructions are self-sufficient for disposal of the writ petition and she does not propose to file any further affidavit and the petition be decided on the basis of the documents available on record, thus with the consent of the parties, writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage.

¶13

The case of the writ petitioner is that the respondents had notified a selection for recruitment on the post of Civil Police Constables on 23.12.2023, the writ petitioner fully eligible and qualified in all respects applied being under S.C. category. The writ petitioner was allotted Roll No. 2005406 and the Registration No. 11384209 and he was allowed to participate in the written examination which was to be conducted on 23.08.2024 and the results whereof was declared on 21.11.2024 and thereafter the document verification and physical standard test stood conducted being date whereof on 23.01.2025, the writ petitioner appeared and participated in the said test and the results were published on 13.03.2025 which the name of the writ petitioner found place at serial no. 10427. Superintendent of Police, Kausambi, fifth respondent, issued a letter to the

¶14

WRIA No. 14698 of 2025

¶15

¶16

writ petitioner on 17.04.2025 for medical examination on 30.04.2025, the writ petitioner appeared before the Medical Examination Committee and also tendered an affidavit on 24.04.2025 mentioning therein that there is no criminal case pending against the writ petitioner. However, the candidature of the writ petitioner has been cancelled by virtue of the order dated 31.07.2025 by the Police Commissioner/ Deputy Commissioner, Commissionerate, Varanasi, respondent no. 6.

¶17

Questioning the same, the writ petitioner has been filed the present writ petition.

¶18

Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that the order cancelling the candidature/ selection of the writ petitioner cannot be sustained for even a single moment, particularly, there is no criminal case either instituted or pending against the writ petitioner. He submits that the writ petitioner had disclosed while submitting an affidavit that there was no criminal case pending. According to him, there happens to be a criminal case bearing FIR No. 281 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Sarai Aquil, Kaushambi against one Dharmendra who is not the writ petitioner as the parent age of Dharmendra is different from the writ petitioner. Submission is that under mistaken identity, the writ petitioner's candidature cancelled on the premise that there happens to be a criminal case which has been disclosed by the writ petitioner. According to him, some more exercise ought to have been conducted as it was always open for the respondents to have verified the said fact as the FIRs are lodged in the police station and it was just a matter or hours but entire claim of the writ petitioner has been kept in jeopardy.

¶19

Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of the instructions submits that though the order recites that the writ petitioner was involved in the criminal case as noted above wherein FIR was lodged against Dharmendra Kumar and the writ petitioner herein was also Dharmendra Kumar but according to her, the matter needs to be revisited and re-inquired while coming to a definite conclusion whether the accused marked in the FIR Dharmendra Kumar is the writ petitioner or not or they are two different persons. She submits that the impugned order be set aside and the matter stands remitted back to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law.

¶20

WRIA No. 14698 of 2025

¶21

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

¶23

Apparently, the candidature of the writ petitioner/ selection has been cancelled on the premise that there happens to be a criminal case being FIR No. 281 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Sarai Aquil, Kaushambi. The writ petitioner claims to be Dharmendra Kumar Diwaker son of Roshan Lal, however, the accused in the first information report is Dharmendra Kumar. A perusal of the chargesheet with respect to the said case which is at page 86 of the paperbook, relevant extract at page 126 shows that Dharmendra Kumar is the son of Ramesh Pasi, resident of Narya Kothi, Thana Sarai Aquil, District Kaushambi. Since the said apsect of the matter has not been dealt with and adverted too in the order impugned and nothing is forthcoming in that regard, thus, the order in question cannot be sustained, accordingly, the writ petition is being decided in the following manner:

¶24

(a). The impugned order dated 31.07.2025 passed by the Police Commissioner/ Deputy Commissioner, Commissionerate, Varanasi, respondent no. 6 is set aside.

¶25

(b). The matter stands remitted back to authority to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law after conducting the investigation in the matter.

¶26

(c). The said proceedings shall be conducted and concluded within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order.

¶27

Needless to point out that the Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶29

Instructions filed today are taken on record as marked as appendix A.

¶30

October 30, 2025

¶31

A. Prajapati

¶32

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

¶33

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharmendra Kumar Diwaker v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Kumar Diwaker v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Siddhartha Dinesh Bhai @ Bhojak Siddharth vs State of U.P. and Another

Madan Mohan Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinay Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

Prem Sagar Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Public Works Deptt. U.P. Shasan Lko. and Ors.

Deepak Gupta and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another