(Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Navin Sinha, JJ.)
Ashish Kumar Yadav & Ors. ______________________ Appellant(s)
v.
The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. __________________ Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 8751 of 2018 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 3508 of 2018] [Diary No(s). 27742 of 2017], decided on April 3, 2018
With
Civil Appeal No. 8752 of 2018 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 3509 of 2018] [Diary No(S). 27974 of 2017]
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by
Kurian Joseph, J.:—
1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. The application(s) for impleadment is/are allowed.
3. These cases pertain to the selection to the post of Police Constables in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The appellants belong to the category of those candidates who are alleged to have used whitener/blade/eraser etc. Their case was also considered along with the similarly situated Sub-Inspector candidates by this Court in Hanuman Dutt Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh as per Judgment dated 19.01.2016 in Civil Appeal Nos. 587-588 of 2016.
4. It is the contention of the appellants that the benefit of the Judgment of this Court was not extended in true spirit. The High Court permitted them to make representations. We are informed that the representations have been considered and rejected.
5. We are also informed that the orders rejecting the representations have been challenged before the High Court of Allahabad by some of the candidates and that those writ petitions are pending.
6. Heard Sh. Salman Khurshid and Mrs. Mahalaxmi Pavani, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. V. Shekhar, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttar Pradesh.
7. It is the contention of the appellants that this Court, having crystalized their rights in the decision in Hanuman Dutt Shukla (supra), and this Court having implemented the Judgment in letter and spirit in the case of Sub-Inspectors, the Police Constables are also entitled to a similar treatment. We do not think that we should go into that question at this stage since the very same contention is raised by the appellants before the High Court and the High Court is seized of the matter.
8. Accordingly, these appeals are disposed of as follows:—
i) We request the High Court to dispose of the writ petitions in the matter of selection to the post of Police Constables from the candidates who are alleged to have used whitener/blade/eraser etc. expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of production of this Judgment.
ii) In the case of those similar candidates who have not yet pursued the remedy before the High Court, they are also free to do so, in which case, their cases will also be considered by the High Court along with the batch of cases which we have referred to above.
9. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
———
