Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Vishal Tripathi vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 April, 2019
Court No. - 2
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6570 of 2019 Petitioner :- Vishal Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Deo Shukla,Amit Kumar Tiwari,Vivek Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner claiming compassionate appointment had earlier filed a petition being Writ-A No. 21395 of 2018 which was disposed of vide order dated 8 October 2018 in terms of the decision rendered in Avtar Singh Versus Union of India and others, 2016(8)SCC 471. It is noted in the order that petitioner had passed the examination of constable recruitment but was not appointed as a criminal case being Case Crime No. 37 of 2018, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. read with section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act came to be registered on 5 February 2018 in which upon investigation final report was submitted on 23 March 2018 by the Investigating Officer.
Consequently, by the impugned order, petitioner has been given compassionate appointment on the post of constable. Grievance of the petitioner is that in the mean time petitioner has qualified and obtained B.A. degree, therefore, contends that the petitioner should be appointed as per his qualification on the post of Sub- inspector and not on the post of constable.
Learned Standing Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to B.A.-III marksheet dated 30 May 2018 and submits that it was not the case of the petitioner before this Court in the earlier round of litigation that the petitioner be considered for appointment on the post of Sub-inspector as per his qualification. The claim setup by the petitioner was that he be considered for appointment on the post of constable. The writ petition was filed in October 2018. It is an after thought that the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment be considered on higher post.
On specific query, learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the petitioner's case was processed for the post of constable and petitioner had appeared for physical efficiency test (PET) for the post of constable.
It is settled principles of law that in the event of petitioner having accepted the post without protest it is not open to the petitioner to raise the issue after joining the post. Petitioner approached this Court some time in October 2018 and it was not his case before this Court that the petitioner be considered for compassionate appointment to the post of Sub-inspector as per the acquired qualification.
In view thereof, at this stage, it is not open to the petitioner to turn around and submit that petitioner be considered for compassionate appointment on a higher post.
The Court declines to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 K.K. Maurya
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Judges
  • Suneet Kumar
Advocates
  • Narendra Deo Shukla Amit Kumar Tiwari Vivek Shukla