Disposed¶26

Ujjawal Prashant v. The Union Public Service Commision and Ors.

Patna HC17 Mar 2025CWJC/2638/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: UPSC; Union Public Service Commission; candidature cancelled; National Defence Academy and Naval Academy Examination (II) 2015; permanent debarment; letter No. 1/8(15)/2018-E.XII dated 09.11.2018; debarment reduced to period undergone from November 2018; Annexure-R/1; counter affidavit; no stigma or impediment; career prospects unaffected; writ disposed as infructuous; Patna High Court; CWJC No. 2638 of 2019; Harish Kumar; 17-03-2025.

What did the court decide?

The Court assured the petitioner that the modified order (Annexure-R/1) shall not affect his future career save and except the period of debarment disclosed therein; the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous. ¶26

Ujjawal Prashant Vs The Union Public Service Commision and Ors. — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2638 of 2019

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Ujjawal Prashant S/o Sri Binod Kumar Verma Resident of Village and PostSadisopur, P.S- Naubatpur, Near Samudayik Bhawan, District- Patna

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Union Public Service Commision and Ors Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi-110069

¶7

The Chairman, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Shahjan Road, New Delhi- 110069

¶8

The Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Shahjan Road, New Delhi-110069

¶9

The Under Secretary (Examination),Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Shahjan Road, New Delhi 110069

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

======================================================

¶12

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyeshwar Prasad, Adv. Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Adv. For the UPSC : Mr. Amish Kumar, Adv.

¶13

======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT

¶15

Date : 17-03-2025

¶16

Heard the parties.

¶17

The petitioner is aggrieved with the order as contained in letter No. 1/8(15)/2018-E.XII dated 09.11.2018 issued under the signature of the Under Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Shehjalam Road, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission’), whereby the Commission has cancelled the candidature of the petitioner for National Defence Academy and Naval Academy Examination (II), 2015 held on 09.09.2018 and has debarred him permanently from appearing in all the further

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.2638 of 2019 dt.17-03-2025 2/3

¶19

examinations/selections to be held by the Commission with immediate effect.

¶20

Learned Advocate for the Commission has drawn the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 4, especially Annexure-R/1 and submitted that a lenient view has been taken by the Commission on being found the case of the petitioner identical to Shri Raj Aryan. Referring to Annexure-R/1, learned Advocate for the Commission has urged before this Court that the Commission has suo motu decided to convert the period of debarment of the petitioner (Shri Ujjawal Prashant) (from appearing in all the examinations) by reducing the same to the actual period of debarment which he had already undergone from November, 2018. Consequently his debarment period stands expended and would be over by the date of issuance of this order.

¶21

In view thereof, learned Advocate for the Commission further contended that now the debarment period stands over, hence the order impugned which has been modified later on lost its effect.

¶22

Learned Advocate for the petitioner refuting the aforesaid contention, contended that since the petitioner was debarred from appearing in all the examinations/selections of

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.2638 of 2019 dt.17-03-2025 3/3

¶24

the Commission, apart from cancellation of his candidature, that would affect him future in his career prospective.

¶25

Suffice it to observe that since the order as contained in Annexure-R/1 is silent over the issue of any stigma or impediment raised by the petitioner, it is observed that the modified order as contained in Anneuxre R/1 shall not affect in any manner, the career of the petitioner in future, save and except the period of debarment, as has been disclosed therein.

¶26

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed, having become infructuous.

¶27

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶28

Anjani/-

¶29

AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 19.03.2025 Transmission Date

Ujjawal Prashant v. The Union Public Service Commision and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ujjawal Prashant v. The Union Public Service Commision and Ors.

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

Kishore Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Nadim Akhter, Vs The State of Bihar

Geeta Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bal Bihari Das Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sabita Paswan Vs The State of Bihar