Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9682 of 2019 Petitioner :- Mohd Zubair And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Jainendra Pandey,Anjani Kumar Mishra,Shreesh Bahadur Tripathi,Surya Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.N. Singh
Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Sri Jainendra Pandey for the petitioner, Sri M.N. Singh Standing Counsel for UP Public Service Commission and Standing Counsel appearing for State of UP.
The writ petition has been filed for quashing the Mains stage of impugned examination of UP Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division), Examination -2018 dated 30.01.2019, 31.01.2019, 01.02.2019 in pursuance of Advertisement No. A- 3/E-1/2018 of UP Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division) Examination -2018 dated 11.09.2018.
In support of his arguments the counsel for the petitioner has raised two grounds before this Court i.e. (i) Smt. Anju Lata Katiyar, Controller of Examination, UP Public Service Commission was arrested in a case of question paper leak of L.T. Grade Teacher Examination 2018 and during investigation statement of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr P C in which Kaushik Kumar Garg, who was given work of printing of question papers has clearly stated that he had been paying 5% commission to Smt. Anju Lata Katiyar. There was a general practice of UP Public Service Commission for using unfair means in conducting the examinations. (ii) similar sequence of enrollment number of candidates have been qualified in the examination.
We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties.
No material has been shown that any unfair means has been used in conducting the examination of UP Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division), Examination -2018. Only on the ground that in some earlier examination any unfair means has been used in conducting the examination, no presumption can be drawn that the present examination has also been conducted by using any unfair means. Similarly on the ground that same sequence of enrollment numbers of the candidates are qualified in the examination, no presumption has been raised that selection of candidates is illegal.
So far as the argument that undue haste has been made in fixing the date of Mains as well as Interview of the said examination is concerned, the petitioners have not been qualified as such they cannot be said as aggrieved party in fixing the early dates.
The writ petition has no merit and it is dismissed.
Order Date :- 24.6.2019 Rahul Dwivedi/-