Uttarakhand High Court
Dinesh Chandra Pandey vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 20 March, 2024
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Pankaj Purohit
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/B) No.95 of 2024
Dinesh Chandra Pandey ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and another ........Respondents
Present:-
Mr. I.D. Paliwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Puran Singh Bisht, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State.
Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no.2-Commission.
JUDGMENT
Coram: Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
challenging the advertisement dated 30.11.2022 (Annexure no.1) and
with a further prayer to direct the respondents to issue the result of
Mains Examination considering 04 posts of Uttarakhand Combined
State Civil/Upper Sub-ordinate Service Exam, 2021 under the category
of Differently-abled Person.
2. The facts shorn-off unnecessary details are that an
advertisement was issued by the respondent-Commission on
30.11.2022 for recruitment on different posts of State (Civil)/Upper
Subordinate Services Examination. The controversy to be decided by
this Court is limited with regard to the reservation meant for the
Differently-abled Persons.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
petitioner participated in the Preliminary Examination and after being
qualified in the Preliminary Examination, he participated in the Mains
Examination, the result of which is not declared, however the result of
other candidates have been declared. It is further contended by learned
counsel for the petitioner that in the impugned advertisement the
details of vacancies have been mentioned in Clause-2 of the
advertisement and the vertical as well as horizontal reservation for the
vacancies, have also been bifurcated. He further pointed out that the
advertisement impugned in the writ petition is incorrect, inasmuch as,
the vacancies for each and every post, which is subject matter of this
advertisement have been bifurcated for horizontal reservation for the
persons suffering with disability, who are entitled to get reservation for
"Differently-abled Persons" category, is not as per law. The
respondent-Commission acting on the principles of the Division Bench
judgment passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No.49 of 2022, Manish
Chauhan and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, has
reverted 04 posts of Differently-abled Persons Category back to the
Government. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, it is
incorrect, illegal and for deprivation of the petitioners, who will be
deprived of the selection due to this arbitrary and unreasonable
exercise of proper by the respondents. It is further argued that the
respondent-Commission instead of giving horizontal reservation to the
person belonging to the "Differently-abled Persons" category has
further wrongly categorized the post reserved for the "Unreserved
Category Candidate/Open Category Candidate" and for "O.B.C". This,
according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is arbitrary and illegal
for the reason that such categorization of giving vertical reservation to
the horizontal post cannot be made by the respondent-Commission.
4. The controversy raised in this petition is no longer res
integra in view of judgment and order dated 19.03.2024 passed by this
Court in WPSB No.68 of 2023 (Chinkal Choudhary vs. State &
another) and two other petitions which were decided together by this
Court directing the respondents to consider and recommend the
petitioner in the order of their merit under the category of Differently-
abled Persons.
5. Following the said ratio, to which learned counsel for the
parties have also agreed, the present petition is also allowed in terms of
aforesaid judgment dated 19.03.2024. The respondent-Commission is
directed to proceed with the selection process and the result in respect
of 04 posts for the mains examination under the category of
"Differently-abled Persons" is directed to be declared immediately but
not later than 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of
this order.
6. No order as to costs.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
20.03.2024
AK
