HUSNA BANO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY placing reliance on the maxim Actus curiae nemine facit injuriam it has been vehemently contended by Shri D. S. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner that this maxim should not only be extended for the Courts but may also be extended to the Administrative authorities.

(2.) BY this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of india, the petitioner is challenging the pregnability of impugned order Annexure P/7 dated 7th September, 2002 by which the candidature of the petitioner who was duly selected on the post of "female Attendant" has been rejected on the ground that the police verification and other connected documents were received late in the office of the respondents.

(3.) IT is no more in dispute that vide Annexure P/6 dated 7th September, 2002 the petitioner was selected on the above said post. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on 11-9-2002 the petitioner reported in the office of respondent No. 3. Thereafter it was directed that police verification of her be made. The contention of learned counsel is that the petitioner put all her efforts to get the things done, but since it was not in her hands to get the police verification done at an early date, therefore merely it was made later on, she cannot be punished for the act of others.