Allahabad High Court
GAURAV AGNIHOTRIversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that there was no ground to interfere with the appointment order and dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Gaurav Agnihotri, son of the then Manager of the Committee of Management of a college, challenged his appointment alleging that it was not made through a fair process. The petitioner argued that his relationship with the Manager, who had an effective role in appointments, rendered the selection biased. The court noted that the petitioner admitted his familial connection and could not dispute the Manager’s involvement in the appointment process. A judgment cited by the petitioner involved a different scenario where a relative of a Principal was appointed, but the court held that the Principal had no role in selection, making that precedent inapplicable. Consequently, the court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it. The petition was therefore dismissed without interference in the impugned order.
Issues considered
- Whether the appointment of the petitioner was made through a fair and unbiased selection process given his relationship to the Manager of the Committee of Management.
Subjects
- appointment
- nepotism
- selection process
- writ petition
- administrative law
- higher education
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 9220 of 2024
Gaurav Agnihotri
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Seemant Singh, Ved Prakash Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for State.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner is not able to dispute that petitioner is
son of the then Manager of Committee of Management of concerned
college and that being Manager, he has effective role in appointment,
therefore, petitioner was not appointed through a fair process.
3. So far as judgment relied upon by learned counsel for petitioner is
concerned, it is on different aspect where relative of Principal was
appointed and admittedly, Principal has no role in selection process,
therefore, said judgment is not applicable in given set of circumstances.
4. Therefore, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with
impugned order. Accordingly, writ petition lacks merit, hence, dismissed.
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
March 18, 2026
N. Sinha
Digitally signed by :-
NIRMAL SINHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…