The Supreme Court in the case Sadaf Imran v. UPPSC observed and has set aside the decision of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, UPPSC to reject the application of the candidate for the Judicial Division i.e., the Junior Division Examination.
The court in the case observed and has directed the UPPSC to declare the results of the petitioner.
The bench comprising of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in its order stated that the rejection of an application of a petitioner at the hands of the state commission shall not come in the way of the declaration of the result of the petitioner’s.
The court in the case observed and has set aside the impugned order of the UPPSC wherein it rejected the candidature of the petitioner-candidate to appear in the Mains Examination.
The bench directed the respondent state commission to declare the result of the petitioner and send the result to the State of Uttar Pradesh and has set aside he impugned order.
In the present case, the said case relates to the denial of the respondent UPPSC to allow one Sadaf Imran to appear in the Judicial Service i.e., the Junior Division Main Examination – 2022 which is conducted by the UPPSC in the month of May 2023.
The petitioner in the case had cleared the preliminary examination and therefore the petitioner was eligible to appear in the mains examination.
Further, the UPPSC refused to allow the petitioner to appear in the Mains exam which being on the ground that she had failed to submit the hard copies of the mains examination application form within the time period, as it reached the commission by a delay of one working day.
It was contended by the petitioner in the plea that due to deficiency of services on the part of the Post Office, her application form reached the office of commission’s with a delay of one working day.
Further, the petitioner in the plea contended that the Mains Examination application form was duly submitted online and was accepted by the UPPSC, but still, she was denied to appear in the Mains examination, and her candidature to appear in the examination was cancelled.
Therefore, the petitioner appealed before the UPPSC against the cancellation of her candidature, but eventually her appeal was rejected by the Commission.
The petitioner approached the Supreme Court as stated under Article 32 of the Constitution of India wherein it claimed that her fundamental right to appear in the examination under Article 21 is violated.
The court in the case observed and has granted an interim relief to the petitioner by directing the Commission to provisionally allow the petitioner to appear in the Mains examination.
Therefore, the petitioner cleared the Mains examination and was found eligible to appear in the interview.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case observed and has asked the Commission to submit the interview result of the petitioner in a sealed cover for the perusal of the court.
Accordingly, the court reserved its judgment on December 12, 2023 after hearing both the parties.
