Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15219 of 2020 Petitioner :- Ratnesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Singh,Kishan Gautam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
By means of the present petition, the petitioner seeks writ of mandamus commanding respondents to provide him one opportunity to appear for biometric test for the purpose of document verification.
Submission is that having qualified at all stages of examination, the petitioner was called for document verification on 11.12.2019.
He, however, could not qualify in the biometric test as there was a cut in his thumb. Submission is that the petitioner was told by the competent authority that his document verification process was postponed and fresh call letter would be issued to him within a short period. No action, however, had been taken by the competent authority and no further opportunity was granted to the petitioner to appear for biometric test/thumb impression to complete the process of document verification.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that certain candidates who had denied consideration on various grounds had been accommodated by this court vide judgment and order dated 18.10.2019 in Writ petition no.3312 of 2019, therein a liberty was granted to the petitioner to participate in the physical standard test and document verification. The contention is that even those candidates who did not participate in the physical standard test and document verification had been accommodated by this Court. The counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that the case of the petitioner is on a better footing, in as much as, he appeared before the competent authority on 11.12.2019 for document verification but the process could not be completed on account of the circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner. He, thus, seeks to submit that the petitioner is entitled to be provided one opportunity by the respondents to complete the process.
Learned standing counsel, on the other hand, disputes the claim of the petitioner.
Having considered the above submissions, it is relevant to note that the present petition has been filed on 17.12.2020, i.e after a period of one year from the date when the petitioner was supposed to appear in the document verification process. The recruitment process had been completed with the declaration of result on 2.3.2019. Even, at that stage, the petitioner had not approached this Court. Reference to the judgment and order dated 18.10.2019 in the aforesaid writ petition is of no benefit to the petitioner, in as much as, the directions therein have been issued during the ongoing recruitment process, whereas herein the recruitment process had been concluded with the declaration of result on 2.3.2020. As the petitioner herein has approach this Court after a period of more than nine months from the date of declaration of results, it is not possible for the Court to issue any direction to the recruiting authority to grant liberty to the petitioner to complete the process of document verification.
The writ petition is, thus, found misconceived and hence dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021 Harshita