MOHD. AYUB versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

MOHD. AYUB versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

The appellant’s application, though incomplete due to absence of medical certificate on the last prescribed day owing to consecutive holidays, is valid and must be considered under s.10 of General Clauses Act, 1897, as law allows such acts to be done on the next working day; failure to consider equity and statutory provision invalidates denial.

Parties
Appellant: Mohd. Ayub; Respondents: State of U.P. and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Division Bench Judgment of Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Computation of Time, Submission of Application, General Clauses Act S.10, Equity
Administrative Law Computation of Time Submission of Application General Clauses Act S.10 Equity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd. Ayub

Appellant

State of U.P. and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Division Bench Judgment of Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an application for the post of Armourer, submitted on the last day with the medical certificate submitted the next day due to holidays, should be considered valid under Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 and principles of equity.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant’s application, though incomplete due to absence of medical certificate on the last prescribed day owing to consecutive holidays, is valid and must be considered under s.10 of General Clauses Act, 1897, as law allows such acts to be done on the next working day; failure to consider equity and statutory provision invalidates denial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of Single Judge dated 18.08.2008 quashed
  • Order of Division Bench dated 09.09.2008 quashed