PREETI MALIK Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner - a woman, could not participate in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) scheduled on 23/3/2021 in pursuance of recruitment process for the post of Jail Warder's (Male, Female) and Mounted Police Constable (Male) Direct Recruitment - 2018 when she was in the family way (7th month of pregnancy). Later on, she delivered a baby on 2/6/2021. She duly communicated about her medical condition to the respondents on 23/3/2021 and subsequently on 26/3/2021 but they remained unheard and in these circumstances, petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that respondents' authorities be directed to conduct Physical Efficiency Test by providing her an attempt.

(2.) Shri Pradumn Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioner has submitted only submission to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to appear for Physical Efficiency Test as she was not able to appear on date fixed due to her pregnancy and delivery of a child.

(3.) The above submissions are opposed by Dr. Amar Nath Singh, learned Standing Counsel that there is no provision of granting any further opportunity to appear for the said Test. He relied upon a judgment passed by the Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Pankaj Kumar; (2022) 1 SCC 335 as well as judgment passed by a co-ordinate in Writ A No.2971 of 2020 (Yogesh Kumar vs. State of U.P. and another), decided on 1/10/2020, that a recruitment process would be meaningless without a time line and second chance to appear could not be provided.