Mukesh Sahu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 2716 of 2026

Mukesh Sahu

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others

¶7

o. n ers		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ambrish Kumar Dwivedi, Abhish Harshita Dwivedi, Singh	Dwivedi, Abhishek ek Kumar Mishra, Satyam Ojha, Shashi
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶8

Court No. - 7

¶9

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Deepshikha, learned Chief Standing counsel for opposite parties.

¶11

The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authority to consider candidature of petitioner for multiple posts covered under the Common Entrance Examination by treating him as a graduate in the Commerce Stream in order to enable to qualify for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Accounts).

¶12

Learned State counsel has been provided written instructions dated 13.03.2026, which are taken on record and as per which the application form of petitioner has been brought on record indicating that petitioner had applied indicating his educational qualification as B.Sc. Learned State counsel has also adverted to Row 24A and 24B to indicate that petitioner has applied for the post of Assistant SubInspector of Police (Ministerial) and Sub-Inspector of Police (Confidential) respectively whereas post for which educational qualification of Commerce is required is in fact that of Assistant SubInspector of Police (Accounts).

¶13

It is therefore submitted that petitioner had incorrectly filled the application form not only with regard to educational qualification but

¶14

WRIA No. 2716 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

also with regard to the preference of post. It is submitted that at the last date of submission of form having already expired, no such indulgence can be granted to petitioner. It is further submitted that even otherwise petitioner is being considered in terms of educational qualifications and his preferences indicated in the application form.

¶17

Learned counsel for petitioner in response thereto submits that petitioner has in fact a degree in subject of Commerce but inadvertently indicated B.Sc. in the application form. It is submitted that the error being unintentional, may be permitted to be corrected.

¶18

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is thus evident and admitted that petitioner incorrectly filled up application form pertaining to his educational qualification. It is also admitted that there is no option of correction of the application form and the last date for submission of such application form has already expired.

¶19

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that apart from having a degree of Commerce, petitioner has also a Bachelor Degree in Science.

¶20

Therefore in view of instruction provided to learned State counsel that petitioner's application would be considered in terms of his educational qualification as indicated in the application form, such liberty is granted to opposite parties.

¶21

The petition therefore stands disposed of .

¶22

(Manish Mathur,J.)

¶23

March 16, 2026 Subodh/-

¶24

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

Mukesh Sahu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Sahu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Shankar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Rizwan vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Teja Singh @ Tej Bahadur Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sri Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Chandrabhal Tripathi @ Bablu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dharmendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another