Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10607 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ganesh Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Mishra,Santosh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kailash Singh Kushwaha
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
By means of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking for quashing of the final select list dated 29.12.2016 published by the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission for 3587 posts of Gram Panchayat Adhikari, pursuant to the advertisement No.7(3)/2015.
As per own admission of the petitioners, the selection on the post of Gram Panchayat Adhikari pursuant to the said select list has been finalized in the month of December 2016 and the petitioners had participated in the selection process but did not qualify.
Three grounds have been taken to challenge the final select list by the learned counsel for the petitioners during the course of argument.
Firstly, it is contended that the ratio of 1:3 for calling candidates for interview, who had participated in the written examination, has not been applied by the selection committee. The second submission is that certain O.B.C candidates who did not qualify in the written examination and could not get into the merit list of unreserved category on the basis of marks obtained in the written examination, were illegally called for interview in that category. Third submission is that there was discrepancies in the written examination held under the guidance of the Commission at different centres, in as much as, at some centres the candidates were given two hours to write exam whereas at other places one and a half hours was given to the candidates.
Thus, in essence, it is sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that several illegalities have been committed in the course of selection process which was finalized approximately one and a half years back.
Both the petitioners had participated in the process of selection and have failed to qualify. They cannot be allowed to turn around and challenge the selection process on the ground noted herein above that too after a period of one and a half years. The pendency of any other writ petition challenging the same selection cannot be taken as a ground to get this writ petition entertained.
For all the above noted reason, the writ petition is found wholly misconceived and hence dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.4.2018 Himanshu