Shweta Kandpal Alias vs State Of Uttarakhand Through
2025 Latest Caselaw 1174 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Shweta Kandpal Alias vs State Of Uttarakhand Through on 9 June, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                     2025:UHC:4715-DB
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     HON'BLE JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI AND
       HON'BLE JUSTICE SRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY

            Writ Petition (S/B) No. 138 of 2016
Shweta Kandpal alias
Sweta Nripendra Lingwal                           --Petitioner
                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand through
Secretary and others                              --Respondents
                           With

            Writ Petition (S/B) No. 137 of 2016

Ravish Kukreti                                    --Petitioner
                               Versus
State of Uttarakhand through
Secretary and others                              --Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Senior Advocate for the petitioner in WPSB No.
138 of 2016
There is no representation for the petitioner in WPSB No. 137 of 2016
Mr. Sushil Vashisth, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent No. 1
Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for respondent No. 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari)

1. Since these two writ petitions involve common questions of law and fact, they were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition (S/B) No. 138 of 2016 alone, are being considered and discussed.

2. Petitioner possesses Bachelor's Degree in Hotel Management. She responded to an advertisement whereby applications were invited for appointment as Management Officer in State Estate Department.

2025:UHC:4715-DB Petitioner's candidature was rejected on the ground that she do not possess the necessary qualification for appointment which is Diploma in Catering and Hotel Management. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner filed this writ petition in 2016, seeking the following reliefs:-

A. Issue a writ order direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the letter No. 133(1)/08/ D.R./ SEWA- 02/2011-12 Dated 19-08-2015 declared that the petitioner is not in possession of the essential education qualification (ANNEXURE NO. 06); and letter No. 205/03/D.R./SEWA-02/02/2011-12; dated 21/11/2015 (ANNEXURE NO. 08)

B. Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner participate in the Interview in pursuance of advertisement No. 03 / D.R./S-2/2011-12 dated 01 October, 2011 advertised post for "Wyawasthadhikari" in State Property Department (ANNEXURE NO. 03)

C. Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the degree of the petitioners valid as and sufficient for the post of "Wyawasthadhikari" in State Property Department and Grant compensation to the petitioner

D. Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to incorporate "Degree in Hotel Management" in advertisement No. 03 / D.R./S-2/2011-12 dated 01 October, 2011 advertised post for "Wyawasthadhikari" in State Property Department at Serial No. 03 (ANNEXURE NO. 02)

E. Issue a writ order direction in the nature of certiorari quashing advertisement No. 03 / D.R./S-2/2011-12 dated 01 October, 2011 advertised post for "Wyawasthadhikari" Department at Serial No. 03 (ANNEXURE NO. 03) in State Property

F. Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to incorporate "Degree in Hotel Management" in "Uttar Pradesh Public Property Department Group B and Group C Service Rules 1983" as adopted by State of Uttarakhand for the post of "Wyawasthadhikari" in State Property Department."

3. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission submits that selection process commenced in 2011 pursuant to

2025:UHC:4715-DB advertisement dated 11.10.2011 and concluded in 2015 and all selected candidates were also appointed in 2015, therefore the issue raised by petitioner is now only of academic interest, as all the vacancies, which was advertised have been filled.

4. This Court finds substance in the said submission. Since there is no interim order passed in favour of petitioner either permitting her to appear in the interview or for keeping any vacancy reserved, therefore no relief can be granted to petitioner at this belated stge.

5. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous.

_______________________________ MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.

____________________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dt: 9th June, 2025 Mahinder

MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA4 3D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.06.10 10:27:14 +05'30'