Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ashish Lodhi Vs. Commandant Head Quarters

Ashish Lodhi vs Commandant Head Quarters

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jul 31, 2012
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1047733

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ashish Lodhi

Advocate Shri. N.C.Beohar

Respondent

Commandant Head Quarters

Advocate Smt. Gaharwar

Excerpt

.....was conducted in the presence of 5 senior officers which constituted the selection committee. for the post of l.d.c. 10 candidates had appeared and the petitioner was declared failed in the selection process. petitioner received 14/90 marks in the written examination, 2/50 in the practical examination and 1/10 in the viva voce. as a result, he had received total 17 marks out of 150 and having failed to qualify, he has not been selected. once, the marks obtained by the petitioner in the examination as is evident from the document annexure r-1 shows that the petitioner had failed in the examination and in the absence of any material to show that the examination had been conducted in an illegal and arbitrary manner, further indulgence into the matter is not called for particularly when the petitioner had miserably failed in the qualifying examination. accordingly, in the light of the fact that the petitioner has not done well in the examination, no case is made out for interference into the matter. however, if the petitioner had qualified as per the rules in any other examination, failure in the present examination shall not come in the way of the petitioner in participating in that selection process subject to be being fit as per the rules. with the aforesaid observations, this petition stands dismissed. (rajendra menon) judge vy/-

Full Judgment

W.P.No.21926/11 31/07/12 Shri N.C.Beohar, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Smt.

Gaharwar, learned counsel for the respondents.

Petitioner was a candidate who submitted an application for appointment on the post of 'L.D.C.' In pursuance to the advertisement Annexure P-1 issued, petitioner applied to participate in the process of selection in the category of handicapped person.

It seems that certain orders were passed, petitioner was permitted to participate in the process of selection and as he had not been selected, petitioner had filed this writ petition.

On notice being issued, respondents have filed the reply and it is pointed out by the respondents that petitioner having failed in the selection process, he could not be appointed.

Subsequently, this Court directed the respondents to produce the entire result with regard to the selection and the respondents have produced the result along with an affidavit filed on 16/05/12 Annexure R-1 to this additional reply is the evaluation sheet with regard to selection on the post of 'L.D.C.' It is seen from the document Annexure R-1 (i.e.the evaluation sheet) that the entire selection process was conducted in the presence of 5 senior officers which constituted the selection committee.

For the post of L.D.C.

10 candidates had appeared and the petitioner was declared failed in the selection process.

Petitioner received 14/90 marks in the written examination, 2/50 in the practical examination and 1/10 in the viva voce.

As a result, he had received total 17 marks out of 150 and having failed to qualify, he has not been selected.

Once, the marks obtained by the petitioner in the examination as is evident from the document Annexure R-1 shows that the petitioner had failed in the examination and in the absence of any material to show that the examination had been conducted in an illegal and arbitrary manner, further indulgence into the matter is not called for particularly when the petitioner had miserably failed in the qualifying examination.

Accordingly, in the light of the fact that the petitioner has not done well in the examination, no case is made out for interference into the matter.

However, if the petitioner had qualified as per the rules in any other examination, failure in the present examination shall not come in the way of the petitioner in participating in that selection process subject to be being fit as per the rules.

With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge Vy/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial