Uttarakhand High Court
SPA/441/2013 of Jeewan Singh Mehta Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS on 28 December 2013
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 441 OF 2013 Jeewan Singh Mehta ……….Appellant. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ……Respondents. Mr. G.C. Kandpal and Mr. H.C. Lohani, Advocates for the appellant. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Chief Standing Counsel
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALSPECIAL APPEAL NO. 441 OF 2013
Jeewan Singh Mehta
……….Appellant.
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others.
……Respondents.
Mr. G.C. Kandpal and Mr. H.C. Lohani, Advocates for the appellant. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4. Coram: Hon'ble Barin Ghosh, C.J.Hon'ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.
Barin Ghosh, C.J. (Oral)
In the format, furnished for responding to the advertisement, it was indicated that certain posts are available exclusively for the people, who are sportspersons. Who were sportspersons was indicated in the format. The first one was sportspersons of International level; the second one was sportspersons of National level; and the third one was sportspersons of State level. The 4[th] one was University / College/ School player. Appellant applied under the sports category. He held out that he comes under the 4[th] category. His candidature has been cancelled and he approached this Court by way of a writ petition. His writ petition has been dismissed. In the writ petition, appellant held out that he established the fact that he is a player of University / College or School by establishing that he had once represented Kumaon University in a cricket match held at DSB Ground, Nainital and the team in which he participated in the match won. The fact remains that much before the advertisement was published and the format was prepared, a Government Order was issued describing the sportspersons, who can be categorized as players of University / College or School by holding out that he must have participated in National level inter-University competition and has owned a medal. The fact remains that the appellant never won a medal. Winning of a medal in Inter-University competition is a requirement to hold out that he is a sportsperson coming under the 4[th] category. Although the Government Order dated 16[th] October, 2006 did not speak about the player in the school, but the said order, as it appears to us, must be read to include those players, who had participated in the inter-School competitions and won medal. Appellant did not win any medal at the School level, nor did he win any medal at the College level or at the University level. The fact remains that it is inconceivable that a student studying in a School has not played. The writ petition of the appellant, having been dismissed, the present Appeal has been preferred. We have not been able to persuade ourselves to take a different view. The Appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 28.12.2013
Rathour