SAVITA RANI YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a candidate for the appointment on the post of Constable. She has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 03rd December, 2015 passed by the second respondent, whereby her representation has been rejected on the ground that the relief which she has sought for compliance of the order of this Court in the case of Matin Rao & Another v. State of U.P. & others, Writ Petition No. 38524 of 2010 has been set aside in Special Appeal Defective No. 343 of 2015 (State of U.P. & Ors. v. Pankaj Kumar) and Special Appeal Defective No. 372 of 2015 (State of U.P. & others v. Matin Rao & another) vide judgements dated 06th May, 2015 and 26th May, 2015.

(2.) A brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice.

(3.) The second respondent issued an advertisement no. 1 of 2009 dated 19th May, 2010 calling applications from the candidates for the appointment on 35000 posts of Constables in Civil Police. The vacancies belonging to Other Backward Class were 9450 posts. Some of the candidates under the OBC category preferred Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38524 of 2010 (Matin Rao & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.) and Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38526 of 2010 (Pankaj Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors.). The basic grievance of the petitioners in the said writ petitions was that the written examination was comprised of four parts and each part contains 40 questions and each question carried 1.25 marks thus 50 marks in each part and 160 questions in total prescribed in four parts carried 200 marks.