RAJAN BABOO Vs. U P PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) These appeals relate to appointment on the basis of selection through the Combined Upper Subordinate Services Examination, 1983, Lower division Assistant Examination, 1984 and Provincial Civil Services examination, 1985 conducted by the U. P. public service commission (hereinafter referred to as "the Commission"). For the purpose of the said selection, there was reservation for the dependants of freedom fighters. The appellant, Rajan Baboo, was selected by the Commission against a post reserved for dependants of freedom fighters, on the basis that he is the son of shri Sita Ram Jaiswal, a freedom fighter. It appears that a complaint was received by the Commission that the appellant is not the legitimate son of shri Sita Ram Jaiswal and he had wrongly availed the benefit of the reservation. On the basis of the said complaint, the Commission referred the matter for enquiry to the District Magistrate, Allahabad. The District magistrate submitted his report dated 2/3/1988 that the appellant is not the legitimate son of Shri Sita Ram Jaiswal and he could not be regarded as the dependant of a freedom fighter. On the basis of the said report of the District magistrate, the Commission passed an order dated 18/4/1988 and took the view that the appellant cannot be held as a legitimate issue of freedom fighter Shri Sita Ram Jaiswal and, therefore, he cannot be given the benefit of a dependant of a freedom fighter. By order dated 9/5/1988, the commission cancelled the candidature of the appellant for the Combined upper Subordinate Services Examination, 1983. The appellant filed two writ petitions (Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petitions Nos. 7670 and 9886 of 1988 before the Allahabad High court to challenge the said two orders dated 12-4-1988 and 9/5/1988. Both these writ petitions were dismissed by the high court by judgment dated 13/2/1989. The case of the appellant is that on the representation made by him, an inquiry was made by Additional district Magistrate, City, Allahabad and he submitted a second report dated 31/1/1989 wherein he expressed the view that the appellant is the legitimate son of Shri Sita Ram Jaiswal. In view of the said report of the Additional district Magistrate, the appellant filed a review petition before the High court which was dismissed by order dated 2/5/1990. Feeling aggrieved by the said orders of the High court dated 13/2/1989 and 2/5/1990, the appellant has filed these appeals.

(3.) During the pendency of these matters this court, on 6/2/1991, passed an order wherein the court has referred to the claim of the appellant that prior to her marriage to Shri Sita Ram Jaiswal on 18/12/1952 at the Arya samaj Mandir at Allahabad, Smt Janaki Devi had been converted to hinduism in the same Mandir on 13/12/1952, and has observed that havingregard to the far-reaching consequences of any declaration that the appellant is not the legitimate son of Shri Sita Ram Jaiswal, it would be appropriate that a proper inquiry should be conducted into the matter by the District judge, Allahabad. By the said order, the court directed the District Judge, allahabad to carry out an inquiry regarding the claims of conversion and marriage which was alleged to have taken place. In pursuance of the said order of this court, the District Judge, Allahabad, conducted an inquiry wherein he afforded opportunity to the appellant as well as to the respondents to adduce evidence. Two questions have been considered by the district Judge, in the said inquiry, viz. , (i) whether Smt Janaki Devi, who earlier belonged to the Muslim religion, was converted to Hinduism on 13/12/1952, as claimed by the appellant, and (ii) whether after such conversion, Smt Janaki Devi was married to Shri Sita Ram Jaiswal on 18/12/1952.