# M/s U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Ram Prakash and others

- **Citation:** (2005) 1 ILRA 85
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2004-11-10
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32167 of 2004
- **Bench:** Arun Tandon
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/m-s-u-p-state-road-transport-corporation-v-ram-prakash-and-others-40390
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

Smt. Sunita Agrawal

Deen
Dayal
Upadhyaya
Gorakhpur
University Rules for Admission to B.Ed.
Course-Entrance Examination for B. Ed.
Course-claim of 15% weightage marks
for admission by petitioner on basis of
N.S.S. Certificates signed
issued by
principal of Institution and counter
signed
by
Project
officer-refusal
of
admission by University on ground that
petitioner not entitled to any weightage
marks-Admittedly petitioner had not put
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2005
86
in 240 hours of service of NSS-Therefore,
she does not fulfill essential qualification
for grant of any weightage marksFurther, under Clause providing for
weightage marks, there is a specific
endorsement that certificate must be
issued by University and Counter signed
by Vice Chancellor-petitioner, held, not
entitled to an weightage marks.

Held: Para 6 & 7

From the conditions so reproduced, it is
apparently clear that a candidate who
has completed 240 hours of service with
attendance in two special camps of
N.S.S. alone is entitled to 15 weightage
marks. A candidate having rendered 240
hours of service with attendance in one
special camp of N.S.S. is entitled to 10
weightage marks while a candidate with
service of 240 hours only is entitled to 5
weightage marks. It is clear from the
aforesaid provisions that before any
weightage
can
be
awarded
by
a
candidate it is mandatory that he must
have completed at least 240 hours of
service in N.S.S. The number of marks
may vary having regard to the number of
special camps attended by the candidate
but the requirement of 240 hours service
is
a
condition
precedent
for
any
weightage marks being awarded in all
the three categories. From the certificate
which
has
been
enclosed
by
the
petitioner
it
is
apparent
that
the
petitioner has been certified to have put
in 120 hours of service in Rashtriya Sewa
Yojana (NSS). In view of the aforesaid it
is admitted position that the petitioner
has not put in 240 hours of service in
NSS and therefore she does not fulfill the
essential qualifications for grant of any
weightage marks. Further the certificate
which
has
been
enclosed
by
the
petitioner along with the application
form has admittedly been signed/issued
by the Principal of the institution and
counter signed by the Project Officer.
Under
the
clause
providing
for
weightage marks there is a specific
endorsement that the certificate must be
issued by the University and counter
signed by the Vice Chancellor. The
certificate produced by the petitioner
does not satisfy the requirement of the
aforesaid clause also.

In view of the above there is no illegality
or
infirmity
in
the
action
of
the
University refusing admission to the
petitioner in B.Ed. course. The writ
petition is accordingly dismissed. No
order as to costs.

## Text

http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1All] M/s U.P. State Road Transport Corporation V. Ram Prakash and others
85
was six months from the date of accident.
Section 166(3) of Motor Vehicle Act, as
enacted, provided:-

"166.
Application
for
compensation-(1) ..... .....
.....................................
.....................................
(3). No
application
for
such
compensation shall be entertained unless
it is made within six months of the
occurrence of the accident:
Provided that the Claims Tribunal may
entertain the application after the expiry
of the said period of six months but not
later than twelve months, if it is satisfied
that the applicant was prevented by
sufficient
cause
from
making
the
application in time."

8. In the case before the apex Court
accident took place on 22.1.1989. The
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 came into force
with effect from 1st July, 1989. The period
of limitation for filing a claim petition
both under the old Act and the new Act
being six months, expired on 22.7.1989.
The claim petition was filed belatedly on
15.3.1990 with a prayer for condonation
of delay. The apex Court considering the
provisions of Section 166(3) of Motor
Vehicle Act held that the limitation has to
be governed by the new law and
condonation being permissible only for a
maximum period of one years, the
application
could
not
have
been
entertained for condonation after one year
from the date of accident. The order of the
Claims
Tribunal
dismissing
the
application as barred by time was upheld
by the apex Court. The apex Court in the
said judgment held that question of
condonation of delay must be governed
by new law. The provisions of Section
166(3) of Motor Vehicle Act which was
considered by the apex Court in the said
judgment is almost similar to provisions
of Section 7(7) of the Act which is under
consideration in the present case. The
judgment of the apex Court as mentioned
above, fully supports the view which is
being taken in this case.

9. In view of foregoing discussions,
it is clear that the appeal filed by the
petitioner was rightly dismissed by the
appellate authority. No grounds have been
made out to interfere with the impugned
orders.

The writ petitions lack merit and are
summarily rejected.
Petition Dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.11.2004

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE ARUN TANDON, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32167 of 2004

Purnima Singh

...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri S.M. Mishra

Counsel for the Respondents:
Smt. Sunita Agrawal

Deen
Dayal
Upadhyaya
Gorakhpur
University Rules for Admission to B.Ed.
Course-Entrance Examination for B. Ed.
Course-claim of 15% weightage marks
for admission by petitioner on basis of
N.S.S. Certificates signed
issued by
principal of Institution and counter
signed
by
Project
officer-refusal
of
admission by University on ground that
petitioner not entitled to any weightage
marks-Admittedly petitioner had not put
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2005
86
in 240 hours of service of NSS-Therefore,
she does not fulfill essential qualification
for grant of any weightage marksFurther, under Clause providing for
weightage marks, there is a specific
endorsement that certificate must be
issued by University and Counter signed
by Vice Chancellor-petitioner, held, not
entitled to an weightage marks.

Held: Para 6 & 7

From the conditions so reproduced, it is
apparently clear that a candidate who
has completed 240 hours of service with
attendance in two special camps of
N.S.S. alone is entitled to 15 weightage
marks. A candidate having rendered 240
hours of service with attendance in one
special camp of N.S.S. is entitled to 10
weightage marks while a candidate with
service of 240 hours only is entitled to 5
weightage marks. It is clear from the
aforesaid provisions that before any
weightage
can
be
awarded
by
a
candidate it is mandatory that he must
have completed at least 240 hours of
service in N.S.S. The number of marks
may vary having regard to the number of
special camps attended by the candidate
but the requirement of 240 hours service
is
a
condition
precedent
for
any
weightage marks being awarded in all
the three categories. From the certificate
which
has
been
enclosed
by
the
petitioner
it
is
apparent
that
the
petitioner has been certified to have put
in 120 hours of service in Rashtriya Sewa
Yojana (NSS). In view of the aforesaid it
is admitted position that the petitioner
has not put in 240 hours of service in
NSS and therefore she does not fulfill the
essential qualifications for grant of any
weightage marks. Further the certificate
which
has
been
enclosed
by
the
petitioner along with the application
form has admittedly been signed/issued
by the Principal of the institution and
counter signed by the Project Officer.
Under
the
clause
providing
for
weightage marks there is a specific
endorsement that the certificate must be
issued by the University and counter
signed by the Vice Chancellor. The
certificate produced by the petitioner
does not satisfy the requirement of the
aforesaid clause also.

In view of the above there is no illegality
or
infirmity
in
the
action
of
the
University refusing admission to the
petitioner in B.Ed. course. The writ
petition is accordingly dismissed. No
order as to costs.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.)

1. Heard Sri S. K. Mishra Advocate
on behalf of the petitioner, Srimati Sunita
Agarwal
Advocate
on
behalf
of
respondent no. 1 and Standing Counsel on
behalf of respondent no. 1.

2. Purnima Singh, the petitioner,
claims to have appeared in the Entrance
Examinations conducted by the Deen
Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur University,
Gorakhpur for admission to B.Ed. course
for the academic session 2004-05. The
result of the said examination was
declared on 212.07.2004. The petitioner
having cleared the entrance examination
was issued a call letter for councilling and
for that purpose she was required to
appear
at
University
Campus
on
03.08.2004. On 03.08.2004 the Head of
B. Ed. Department refused admission to
the petitioner in B. Ed. course on the
ground that the certificates of Rashtriya
Sewa Yojana (National Service Scheme)
(hereinafter
referred
to
as
N.S.S.)
enclosed by her for the purposes of
claiming weightage of 15 marks because
of her having worked for more than 240
hours under the National Service Scheme
with at least two special camps, was
factually incorrect and therefore she is not
entitled to 15 weightage marks which
have been wrongly awarded to her. It was
also pointed out that the N.S.S. certificate
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
1All] Purnima Singh V. State of U.P. and others
87
enclosed by the petitioner was not counter
signed by the Vice Chancellor of the
University nor it has been issued by the
University. Feeling aggrieved by the
aforesaid action of the respondents the
petitioner has filed the present writ
petition for a writ of mandamus directing
the respondents to admit the petitioner in
B.Ed. course.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed
on behalf of the University. Along with
the counter affidavit the application form
submitted by the petitioner has been
enclosed whereunder she has claimed 15
weightage marks because of her being
possessed of the certificate of N.S.S. The
respondents have also brought on record
copy of the rules for admission which
were enclosed as part of the application
form and circulated to all the students
concerned, on the basis whereof it is
contended that the petitioner is not
entitled to any weightage marks and
therefore it is asserted that the petitioner
has rightly been refused admission in
B.Ed. course.

4. For the purposes of appreciating
the controversy raised in the writ petition
following facts are retrial. It is an
undisputed fact that in the application
form the petitioner had claimed 15
weightage marks because of her being
possessed of N.S.S. certificate. A copy of
the N.S.S. certificate enclosed by the
petitioner along with her application form
and relied upon by the petitioner has been
filed as annexure-6 to the writ petition,
which reads as follows:--

izek.k&Ik=
 izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS fd iwf.kZek flag iq=h Jh j.kfot;
izrki flag us bl egkfo/kky; ls jkIVzh; lsok ;kstuk dh
f}rh; bdkbZ esa oiZ 2001-2002 ,ao 2002-2003 esa Hkkx
fy;kA budk dk;Z 120 ?k.Vas rd gqvkA nl fnolh; fo'ksi
f'kfoj nl fnuksa rd dke fd;kA

gLrk{kj

izkpk;Z
dk;Zdze

 nhukukFk ik.Ms; jktdh; efgyk
vf/kdkjh LukrdksRrj egkfo/kky;]nsofj;kA
jk0 ls0 ;kstuk eksgj
izkpk;Z

nhukukFk ik.Ms; jktdh; efgyk

LukrdksRrj egkfo/kky;]nsofj;kA

5. For the purposes of determining
as to whether in view of the said
certificate the petitioner is entitled to 15
weightage marks as claimed by her or not
reference may be had to the relevant
clauses of the rules applicable for
admission to B.Ed. course as notified by
the University, copy whereof has been
enclosed as annexure CA-2 to the counter
affidavit filed by the University, the
relevant portions whereof are as follows:-
-
jkIVzh; lsok ;kstuk ds vUrxZr 240 ?k.Vs
dh lsok ,ao nks ;k nks ls vf/kd fo'ksi
f'kfoj esa Hkkj ysus okys vH;FkhZ dks 15 vad
 ;k
jkIVzh; lsok ;kstuk ds vUrxZr 240 ?k.Vs
dh lsok ,ao ,d fo'ksi f'kfoj esa Hkkj ysus
okys vH;FkhZ dks 10 vad
 ;k
jkIVzh; lsok ;kstuk ds vUrxZr 240 ?k.Vs
dh lsok djus okys vH;FkhZ dks 5 vad

jkIVzh; lsok ;kstuk dk izek.k&Ik= fo'ofo/kky; }kjk iznRr
,ao dqyifr }kjk izfrgLrk{kfjr gksus ij gh ekU; gksxkA

6. The applicability of the aforesaid
conditions has not been disputed on
behalf of the petitioner. From the
conditions so reproduced, it is apparently
clear that a candidate who has completed
240 hours of service with attendance in
two special camps of N.S.S. alone is
entitled to 15 weightage marks. A
candidate having rendered 240 hours of
service with attendance in one special
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2005
88
camp of N.S.S. is entitled to 10 weightage
marks while a candidate with service of
240 hours only is entitled to 5 weightage
marks. It is clear from the aforesaid
provisions that before any weightage can
be awarded by a candidate it is mandatory
that he must have completed at least 240
hours of service in N.S.S. The number of
marks may vary having regard to the
number of special camps attended by the
candidate but the requirement of 240
hours service is a condition precedent for
any weightage marks being awarded in all
the three categories. From the certificate
which has been enclosed by the petitioner
it is apparent that the petitioner has been
certified to have put in 120 hours of
service in Rashtriya Sewa Yojana (NSS).
In view of the aforesaid it is admitted
position that the petitioner has not put in
240 hours of service in NSS and therefore
she
does
not
fulfill
the
essential
qualifications for grant of any weightage
marks. Further the certificate which has
been enclosed by the petitioner along
with the application form has admittedly
been signed/issued by the Principal of the
institution and counter signed by the
Project Officer. Under the clause
providing for weightage marks there is a
specific endorsement that the certificate
must be issued by the University and
counter signed by the Vice Chancellor.
The certificate produced by the petitioner
does not satisfy the requirement of the
aforesaid clause also.

7. In view of the above there is no
illegality or infirmity in the action of the
University refusing admission to the
petitioner in B.Ed. course. The writ
petition is accordingly dismissed. No
order as to costs.
Petition Dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.11.2004

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE S.N. SRIVASTAVA, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52002 of 2002

Mritunjay Mishra

...Petitioner
Versus
Chief General Manager State Bank of
India and another
...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri M.S. Khan

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Vipin Sinha

Dying in Harness Rules-Compassionate
appointment-request for, by eldest son
of deceased employee-Rejection by Bank
Authorities by cryptic order-ValidityIncome
of
family
of
deceased
not
correctly assessed by Bank authoritiesDeceased left behind five school going
children-Four daughters to be marriedliabilities not taken into account while
assessing
income-non
application
of
mind-Impugned order not sustainablebenefit
of
employment
by
way
of
compassionate appointment under Dying
in Harness Rules, held, should flow
liberally
unless
there
be
clinching
endorse demonstrate that family of
deceased had sufficient means to fall
back upon-Scheme for compassionate
appointment a beneficial legislationNationalized Bank an in stementality of
State, expected to behave as a model
employer-No
reasons
assigned
for
conclusion that fiscal condition of family
would enobbe family to meet crisesDecision by authorities held, selective
and not objective-Hence impugned order
quashed.

Held: Paras 11,12,13 & 14