Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs 2.2020 on 23 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA
AND
JUSTICE SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 178 OF 2020
23rd MARCH, 2022
Between:
Vibhu
D/o Dr. Bharat Bhushan Chauhan
...... Petitioner
And
Uttarakhand Public Service Commission
Through its Secretary, Office at Gurukul
Kangri University Campus, Haridwar ...... Respondent
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Abhijay Negi, learned counsel
Counsel for the respondent : Mr. B.D. Kandpal, learned counsel
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the
following
JUDGMENT: (per the Acting Chief Justice Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra)
The petitioner in this case, an aspirant to the
post of Assistant Conservator of Forest, has filed this
writ petition praying for the following reliefs : -
i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
certiorari quashing the order dated
18.03.2020 as being contrary to the directions
of the Apex Court in Ms. Aakriti Bahuguna Vs
2
State of Uttarakhand, SLP (C) 29799 / 2019
dated 17.12.2019.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing the Uttarakhand Public
Service Commission to allow the petitioner to
appear for the mains examination of the
Assistant Conservator of Forest.
iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction which
this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest
of justice, equity and good conscience.
2) While considering this matter, this Court on
08.03.2021, passed an interim order. But before
reverting to the interim order, we take note of the fact
that the petitioner applied for the post of Assistant
Conservator of Forest, and in pursuance of the
application, she was allowed to appear in the preliminary
examination. Subsequently, she qualified the
preliminary examination. As per the requirement of the
advertisement, the petitioner was supposed to deposit
the requisite fee and documents for the main
examination by 01.02.2020.
3
3) The Uttarakhand Public Service Commission
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission' for brevity)
issued two advertisements. The second advertisement is
of 17.01.2020. This Court taking into consideration the
second advertisement had passed on dated 08.03.2021,
the following order:
7. A bare perusal of the advertisement
dated 17.01.2020 clearly reveals that in Item -5,
the last date for submission of the documents and
the fees is given as 01.02.2020. However, Item -8
clearly stipulates that those candidates, who have
failed to deposit their documents and the fees by
01.02.2020, would be given a grace period till
10.02.2020. Obviously, the advertisement dated
17.01.2020 supersedes the original advertisement
dated 30.07.2019. Therefore, the Commission is
unjustified in relying on the original advertisement
dated 30.07.2019. Therefore, the petitioner has an
extremely strong case in her favour.
8. No harm would be caused to the
Commission if the petitioner were allowed to appear
in the main Examination on a provisional basis.
Thus, the balance of convenience is in favour of the
4
petitioner. Moreover, in case she is denied the
right to appear in the Main Examination, an
irreparable loss would be caused to her. Therefore,
this Court directs the respondent-Commission to
permit the petitioner provisionally to appear in the
main examination which is tentatively scheduled to
be held on 13.03.2021. The result of the petitioner
shall be declared only after seeking a prior
permission of this Court.
4) In that view of the matter, the petitioner was
allowed to appear in the examination on depositing the
fee late. Thereafter, on 15.02.2021, the result of the
petitioner was filed in this Court in a sealed cover, and
this Court records that the petitioner has passed the
main examination as per the result produced by the
respondent-Commission.
5) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that appropriate directions may be given to the
Commission to publish the result and proceed with the
process of selection.
6) The learned counsel for the respondent-
Commission, on the other hand, relies upon the
judgment of this Court passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No.
5
552 of 2019, Aakriti Bahuguna Vs Uttarakhand Public
Service Commission, decided on 06.12.2019, wherein
this Court has held that the petitioner, having failed to
appear in the main examination and having failed to pay
the prescribed fees on time, cannot now contend that,
for her failure to secure the information from the website
of the respondent-Commission, she should now be
permitted to appear in the main examination. In any
event, the main examination has already been held, and
the results have already been declared.
7) However, that order was challenged by said
Aakriti Bahuguna before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 29799 of
2019. The Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following
ad-interim order on 17.12.2019 :
Considering the fact that the petitioner had
qualified the Preliminary Examination and her
candidature for Main Examination is getting rejected on
technical grounds, such as, non-deposit of fee and non-
submission of online Application Form, we pass the
following ad-interim directions:
(a) The petitioner shall submit the
requisite fee and the concerned
6
Application Form within three days
from today;
(b) If the requisite Form is filed and fee is
deposited within the stipulated time,
the Uttarakhand Public Service
Commission shall accept the Form/Fee
and accept the candidature of the
petitioner for the Main Examination;
(c) Uttarakhand Public Service Commission
shall issue to the petitioner, the
Examination Hall Ticket and permit her
to appear in the Examination; and
(d) The result of the petitioner shall
however be withheld till further orders
by this Court.
8) Keeping in view the spirit of the interim order
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we consider that
if the petitioner has qualified the preliminary
examination, and on some technical ground her
application was rejected by the Commission, and denied
her the chance to appear in the main examination, and
by virtue of the order passed by this Court in the
interim, as quoted above, she has appeared in the
7
examination, and has come out successful, then in the
interest of justice and also in the interest of competition,
the result should be declared by the Commission.
9) In that view of the matter, the writ petition is
allowed with the direction that the respondent-
Commission shall declare the result of the recruitment
process, as early as possible, treating the petitioner to
be a qualified candidate to sit in the main examination,
and proceed further with the same, and complete the
same within a reasonable time.
10) With such observation, the writ petition stands
disposed of.
11) Urgent copy of this order be supplied to the
learned counsel for the parties, as per Rules, during the
course of the day.
____________________________
SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J.
______________________
RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE, J.
Dated: 23rd MARCH, 2022
Negi
