Bed Prakash v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1165 of 2021 Bed Prakash S/o Shri Chinturam, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Bicharpur, Post Rajpur, Thana Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home (Police), Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.

Director General Of Police, Police Headquarters, Block No. 4 Sector19, Near Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3.

Additional Director General Of Police (Recruitment/ Selection), Police Headquarters, Block No. 4 Sector-19, Near Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4.

Inspector General Of Police Bilaspur Range, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate along with Mr. Topilal Bareth, Adv.

For State :

Mr. Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 15/02/2021 1.

The counsel for the petitioner at the outset makes a limited request that the petitioner has preferred a representation to the respondent No.4 in respect of the marks that he has scored in the Physical Proficiency Test that he has undergone on 08.02.2021. In the said Physical Proficiency Test the petitioner is said to have scored 49 marks and the minimum required qualifying marks for recruitment is 50.

2.

According to the petitioner, the said representation that the petitioner has made is for enhancement of the marks, so that the petitioner

becomes qualified for being considered for recruitment to the post of Constable (2018). The counsel for the petitioner further submits that the said representation again is in terms of the Rules of 2007, which permits a candidate to approach the authorities, who has scored less marks, seeking for an appropriate redressal of his grievance. 3.

The State counsel submits that under the Rules it has to be an appeal that has to be preferred and the petitioner has preferred an appeal.

4.

Given the undisputed fact that the petitioner has undergone a Physical Proficiency Test on 08.02.2021 and the petitioner himself admits the fact that the petitioner has scored 49 and the requirement is 50 and that for the said grievance he has already preferred a representation to the Committee under the Rules headed by the respondent No.4, the writ petition at this juncture can be disposed of directing the respondent No.4 as also the Committee to decide the appeal under the Rules of 2007, so preferred by the petitioner expeditiously preferably before the final results are declared. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved