ALOK KUMAR SINGH & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

Citation: [2018] 14 S.C.R. 328 · Decided: 27-11-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH · Disposal: Directions issued

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
328                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2018] 14 S.C.R.
ALOK KUMAR SINGH & OTHERS
v.
STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 11370 of 2018)
NOVEMBER 27, 2018
[KURIAN JOSEPH AND UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.]
Uttar Pradesh Sub-Inspector and Inspector (Civil Police)
Service Rules, 2018 – rr.6, 14 and 15 – Selection undertaken in
respondent-State pursuant to advertisement for recruiting 4010 posts
namely 3698 posts of Sub-Inspectors (Civil Police) and 312 posts
of Platoon Commander (Provincial Armed Constabulary or PAC)
of Uttar Pradesh – Final results were published seeking to fill up
all the posts except 226 posts namely 205 and 21 posts reserved for
dependents of freedom fighters – Challenge raised to the selection
of certain candidates inter alia on the ground that said candidates
had used whitener/blade while answering questions in the main
examination – Final results revised excluding names of all such
candidates – Challenge to – Direction by Supreme Court in Hanuman
Dutt Shukla case that such candidates whose names were excluded
as a result of use of whitener or blade in the main examination,
would also be accommodated – List of 809 successful candidates
declared – Entire selection process and the revised final result again
challenged in the High Court – Writ petitions dismissed – In the
meantime, another set of petitions challenged the entire selection
process – Direction that the result of the main written examination
be prepared afresh, affirmed by the Division Bench of the High
Court in Special Appeal No.416 of 2016 – On appeal, held:
Considering the facts that the present selection has seen various
interventions including revision in final list on more than one
occasion and considering the large number of vacancies of 607
posts where certain candidates either discontinued training or did
not qualify in medical examination/character verification, as a one
time exception it is directed that such 607 posts be made available
in the present selection itself – Decision of the High Court in Special
Appeal No.416 of 2016 was correct – Going by the Rules, only
12030 candidates could have been allowed to participate in Group
[2018] 14 S.C.R. 328
328
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
329
Discussion against the number of 14256 – But at this length of
time, it would be inappropriate to re-do the exercise and eliminate
the excess number from consideration, more particularly when the
number of 14256 represents all those who secured 50% or more
marks in the written examination and there are still 607 vacancies
to be filled up – In terms of the decisions of Supreme Court in
Hanuman Dutt Shukla case 809 candidates were given benefit,
followed by 24 similarly situated candidates – To this number of
833, 189 similarly situated candidates will have to be added as
dealt with in the order passed by Supreme Court – This aspect was
repeatedly made clear that those vacancies would be in addition –
Therefore, total number of candidates who could be selected in the
selection relatable to the year 2011 in any case ought not to be less
than 4010+1022 – Directions issued.
Issuing directions, the Court
HELD:  1.1 Considering the facts that the present selection
has seen various interventions including revision in final list on
more than one occasion and considering the large number of
vacancies of 607 posts where certain candidates either
discontinued training or did not qualify in medical examination/
character verification, as a one time exception it is directed that
such 607 posts be made available in the present selection itself.
One more reason for such direction is that large number of posts
namely more than 8000 posts are currently available for
succeeding selections.  Similarly, the decision of the High Court
in Special Appeal No.416 of 2016, was correct.  Going by the
Rules, only 12030 candidates could have been allowed to
participate in Group Discussion against the number of
14256.  But at this length of time, it would be inappropriate to
re-do the exercise and eliminate the excess number from
consideration, more particularly when the number of 14256
represents all those who secured 50% or more marks in the
written examination and there are still 607 vacancies to be filled
up. [Para 25][347-E-H]
1.2 In the order dated 31.10.2017, Supreme Court had
emphasized the adherence to eligibility of 50% while the order
dated 30.11.2017 had directed completion of Selection process
ALOK KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF U.P.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
33

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.