Wednesday, 17, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Dr. Prabhakar Tyagi vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 3243 UK

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 3243 UK
Judgement Date : 25 June, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

Dr. Prabhakar Tyagi vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 25 June, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
                                                                 2025:UHC:5356-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. 470 of 2014
Dr. Prabhakar Tyagi                                             --Petitioner
                                     Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others                            --Respondents
                            With
               Writ Petition (S/B) No. 280 of 2016
Dr. Tripti                                                 --Petitioner
                                     Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others                            --Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocates:-
Ms. Jasmeet Kaur, Advocate holding brief of Mr. S.S. Yadav, Advocate for the
petitioner
Mr. Puran Singh Rawat, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of
Uttarakhand
Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission
through video conferencing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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. 470 of 2014 alone, are being considered and discussed.

2. Petitioner participated in a selection held by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission for the post of Assistant Professor (History). Since petitioner was not selected, therefore he filed this writ petition in 2014, seeking following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of quashing the line of Clause 5 (Ga) mentioned as "िविजिटंग लै�रर / अंशकािलक प्रव�ा के �प म� काय�रत् अ�िथ�यों को परी�ा / सा�ा�ार म� उनके �ारा प्रा� कुल अंकों के अिधकतम 10 प्रितशत बोनस अंक िदये जाय�गे। The English version is here:-(The Visiting Lecturer/Part-time Lecturer will be given maximum 10% marks).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of quashing the result dated 26-06-2014 of History subject concerned to the private respondent no. 4.

2025:UHC:5356-DB

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 1, 2 and 3 to rectify the anomaly of selection process of History subject that is concern to the petitioner in regard to awarding 10% bonus mark to the petitioner as Higher Education Amended Rules 2011 of 9 (Gha) & 9 (Cha) and also as per advertisement No. 04/D.R./Degree/Sewa-2/ 2011-12/dated 04-12-2011.

(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to award the 10% bonus mark to the petitioner in the selection process of History subject held on 13-01-2014 to 15-01- 2014 so far concerned to the petitioner and declare the result of History subject awarding the proper opportunity to the concern effected respondent no. 4 and further prayed to summon the record/broad-sheet of the Interview Board.

(v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to resolve the controversy adjusting the petitioner on the vacant post of History as a regular faculty/Assistant Professors of History subject."

3. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission submits that identical issue was decided by coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 469 of 2014 in which reliefs sought were also identical. He has produced copy of the judgment dated 24.04.2025, rendered in the said writ petition.

4. Upon perusal of the judgment, we find substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission that the issue involved in that writ petition was identical.

5. In such view of the matter, present writ petitions are disposed of in terms of judgment dated 24.04.2025, rendered in WPSB No. 469 of 2014.

_______________________________ MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.

____________________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dt: 25th June, 2025 Mahinder

MAHINDER

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT

2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f

SINGH 031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC46 26D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH

2025:UHC:5356-DB

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter