Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6593 of 2021 Petitioner :- Shailesh Yadav Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Rakesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondents no.1 to 4.
The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for following reliefs:-
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the competent authority to send the petitioner for training on the post of the Soldier General Duty with roll no.LUC/VA/GD/230220/1533 in pursuance to advertisement issued by the Army Recruiting Office, Varanasi in August, 2019."
It appears that pursuant to advertisement for recruitment of Soldier General Duty, the petitioner submitted application for consideration of appointment. After completion of selection process, the petitioner has been selected on 07.03.2020. The petitioner was to go for training but due to pandemic of COVID-2019, he could not be sent for training.
This Court on 11.08.2011 directed the learned counsel for the respondents to seek instructions in the matter.
Sri Rakesh Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents on the basis of instructions submits that a complaint in respect to appointment of petitioner is received by respondents that a criminal case under Sections 147, 323, 506 IPC is registered as case crime no.552 of 2020 and, therefore, the petitioner has not been sent for training. The instructions is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that First Information Report which is alleged to have been lodged against the petitioner subsequent to date of selection and it has been lodged only with a mala fide intention to stop the petitioner for going for training. He submits that the case of petitioner is covered by the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India (2016) 8 SCC 471 and, therefore, the respondent no.4 has acted in arbitrary and illegally and in the teeth of judgement of the Apex Court in Avtar Singh (supra) in not sending the petitioner for training.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to respondent no.4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case and with the consent of the parties, the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.4-Area Recruitment Officer (ARO) Army, Varanasi, raising all his grievances within a period of two weeks from today. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.4 shall decide the same as per law within a period of one month thereafter.
The writ petition is disposed of subject to the observations made above.
Order Date :- 24.8.2021 SS