Uttarakhand High Court

Rohit Singh vs Chairman on 2 May, 2024

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
          Writ Petition (S/S) No.729 of 2024
Rohit Singh                                     ........Petitioner
                        Versus
Chairman, Uttarakhand Public Service
Commission, Haridwar                 ........Respondent
Presence:-
     Mr. M.S. Pal, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms.
     Medha Pande, learned counsel for the petitioner.
     Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the sole
     respondent-Commission.

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has filed by the petitioner seeking a mandamus to the respondent- Commission to consider the candidature of the petitioner within the category of differently-abled persons in Uttarakhand Combined State Junior Engineer Service Examination-2023 conducted by the respondent.

3. The petitioner, pursuant to the advertisement dated 14.10.2023, has submitted his application form for the post of Junior Engineer in the Uttarakhand Combined State Junior Engineer Service Examination- 2023 conducted by the respondent.

4. The petitioner appeared in the examination as a Scheduled Tribe (ST) candidate. He participated in the examination. The result for the same is still awaited. But, now, the petitioner wants his candidature to be considered in the category of differently-abled person. In other words, he wants benefit of reservation, which is available to the differently-abled persons.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent- Commission has submitted that the petitioner has never that claim for reservation by filing the on-line application, and, therefore, at this belated stage, the same cannot be given to him.

6. It is further pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) No.(S) 19532/2010, the benefit of reservation cannot be extended to those candidates, who failed to fill up the category while filling the application form.

7. However, it is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that a representation by the petitioner has been submitted to the respondent- Commission for the same purpose, which is still pending consideration and the respondent-Commission be directed to take a decision on the representation filed by the petitioner.

8. In this view of the matter, writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the respondent- Commission to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner (Annexure No.6) within a period of two weeks' from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

9. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 02.05.2024 PN