JITENDRA DEO PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed for issuing writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Principals District Education and Training Institute to accept application form of the petitioners and consider the candidature of the petitioners for Special B.T.C. Training Course 2008. The respondents invited applications for admission to Special B.T.C. Course 2008 by various advertisements issued between 18th of January 2009 to 31st of January 2009. There was stipulation in the said advertisements that only those applications would be considered which are received in the office of different District Institutes of Educational Training (DIET) on or before 5 PM on 20th February 2009. The advertisements prescribed only one mode of submitting application forms i.e. by registered/speed post. It is contended that the petitioners had sent their application forms to the respective D.I.E.Ts. before 20th February 2009, but as they were delivered to the respective D.I.E.Ts. after the cut off date, the registered/speed post letters were returned and were not accepted. This has forced the petitioners to approach before this Court claiming a mandate to the different D.I.E.Ts. to accept their application forms. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the post offices were the agent of the respondents and thus they cannot be penalised for the delay in delivery of the application forms. They have relied upon a Division Bench decision of this court rendered in the case of Shashi Bhushan Kumar Vs. U.P. Higher Education Service Commission and others [2000 (4) A.W.C. 2947], a Single Judge decision of this Court in Vinod Kumar Vs. State of U.P. [2004 (3) E.S.C. 1395] and a unreported decision of this Court rendered in the case of Sarvesh Kumar Rai Vs. State of U.P. and others writ petition no. 38711 of 2007) decided on 23.8.2007. It is admitted that only one mode of submission of application forms was provided by the respondents and, therefore, in view of the aforesaid three decisions, it has to be held that the post office was the agent of the respondents. However, it is urged on behalf of the State that those petitioners cannot be extended any benefit who had posted the forms couple of days before the last date. This aspect has also been considered by this Court in Vinod Kumar and Sarvesh Kumar Rai's case (Supra) where it has been held that even though application form is sent through post office on the last date, on the principle that agent would replace the principal apply and therefore, even those applications which had been sent by registered post on 20.2.2009 itself would have to be treated as within time. View mentioned above has been taken by this Court while disposing of Bunch of the writ petitions on 02.04.2009 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14819 of 2009(Satya Narayan Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others). For the reasons stated above, present writ petition also succeeds and are allowed. Director State Educational Research and Training Institute, Nishatganj Lucknow is directed to issue necessary directives to respective Principals District Education and Training Institute in this regard.