9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1518X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commission u/s 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaya Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005. 2- Petitioner (respondent No.1 herein) was a candidate who appeared in the examination conducted by the M.P. State Public Service Commission for recruitment to various services in the State namely; the State Service Examination 2010. Results of the petitioner with regard to the said examination was declared on 29.8.2013 and after declaration of the result, petitioner submitted a representation and sought supply of the answer-book of the examination under the Right to Information Act. The same was supplied to the petitioner in December, 2013 and thereafter petitioner submitted a representation indicating that there is some error in val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aching this Court the relief granted and the directions issued in para 12 of the order passed by the learned writ Court cannot be granted as after the State Service Examination 2010 was conducted examinations for the years 2014 and 2015 were also conducted and various appointments have been made based on the State Service Examination 2012 and 2014 conducted and without evaluating the position with regard to availability of vacancy right of other candidate, it is stated that the direction issued by the learned writ Court cannot be implemented in the manner and once it is clear that the petitioner has caused the delay, it is stated that the relief granted is not permissible. 3- Shri Arvind Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elief granted cannot be worked out and it is indicated to us that the question of delay in filing of the writ petition has not been considered by the learned writ Court while granting relief to the petitioner. We find that there is much force in this objection raised before us, both by the State Government and by the Public Service Commission. 7- Admittedly, the results of the examinations were declared on 29.8.2013 and thereafter according to petitioner's own showing appointment orders were started to be issued in 2014 itself. The petitioner received the answer-book under the Right to Information Act in December 2013 and at that point of time even before the appointment orders were made the petitioner was of the know in the matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
