[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/1274/2024 on 17 February, 2026
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
2026:UHC:1047
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
WPSS/1274/2024
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
1. Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the petitioners.
2. Mr. N.K. Papnoi, learned Standing
Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, learned
counsel for respondent no. 3.
4. Petitioners are serving as Constable
in Provincial Armed Constabulary.
Uttarakhand Police Headquarter issued
two advertisements on 22.01.2021, one
inviting applications for promotion of
constables/Head Constables to the post
of Platoon Commander, and another,
inviting applications for promotion of
constables to the post of Head
Constable.
5. Petitioners responded to the
advertisement, whereby applications
were invited for promotion to the post of
Head Constable, but they were declared
unsuccessful.
6. According to petitioners, as many as
32 candidates, who were selected and
promoted as Head Constable, were also
selected for promotion as Platoon
Commander, and they joined duties as
Platoon Commander on 22.01.2021.
Thus, petitioners contend that the 32
vacancies, which arose on account of
resignation by 32 candidates who were
also promoted as Platoon Commander,
should be supplied by taking candidates
as per merit from the same selection
process, which was held pursuant to
2026:UHC:1047
advertisement dated 22.01.2021.
7. Petitioners made a representation,
staking claim for promotion to the post
of Head Constable against vacancies
which arose on account of resignation
tendered by those 32 persons. The
representation was, however, rejected on
the ground that the applicable
Recruitment Rules were amended in
2022. Petitioners challenged the rejection
order in WPSS No. 2186 of 2023, which
was allowed and the Competent
Authority was directed to take decision
on the representation afresh.
8. Pursuant to the order dated
06.12.2023 passed in WPSS No. 2186 of
2023, Deputy Inspector General, PAC,
Uttarakhand passed another order on
30.05.2024, which is under challenge in
this writ petition. By the said order,
claim of petitioners for appointment
against 32 consequent vacancies, was
rejected. The reason assigned is that
since those 32 candidates joined on the
post of Head Constable, when promotion
was offered to them and they tendered
resignation thereafter when they were
offered promotion to the post of Platoon
Commander.
9. In the impugned rejection order,
reliance is placed upon a judgment
rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of State of Punjab v. Raghbir
Chand Sharma, reported as AIR 2001
(SC) 2900.
10. Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioners submits that
since as many as 237 vacancies on the
post of Head Constable were notified,
vide advertisement dated 21.01.2021
2026:UHC:1047
and out of those 237 vacancies, 32 are
yet to be filled, therefore, petitioners,
who participated in the selection, have a
right to be considered for appointment
against those 32 unfilled vacancies, as
per their merit.
11. Learned State Counsel, however,
submits that since 32 persons, who were
selected against the aforesaid 237
vacancies accepted the offer of
promotion and joined duties as Head
Constable, and after serving as Head
Constable for about six months, they
resigned when they were offered
promotion to the post of Platoon
Commander on the result of selection
held pursuant to a different process,
which was also initiated vide
advertisement dated 21.01.2021. He
submits that two separate selection
process were initiated by two
advertisements, which were incidentally
issued on the same day; however, since
32 candidates who were selected, joined
duties as Platoon Commander after
resigning from the post of Head
Constable, therefore, the consequent
vacancies have to be treated as future
vacancies, which have to be carried
forward for the next selection. He further
submits that all 237 candidates, who
were selected for the post of Head
Constable joined as Head Constable,
therefore, if any person tenders
resignation after joining, then such
vacancy has to be treated as future
vacancy as per the settled law. He
submits that similar view was taken by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment
relied upon by Deputy Inspector General
in the impugned order.
12. This Court finds substance in the
2026:UHC:1047
submission made by learned State
Counsel. Law is well settled that if a
candidate tenders resignation after
joining a post, then such vacancy can not
be supplied by taking a candidate from
wait list and it is to be treated as future
vacancy and it cannot be filled on the
result of the same selection.
13. Thus, there is no scope for
interference. The writ petition is,
accordingly, dismissed.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
17.02.2026
Aswal
NITI RAJ Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
SINGH
2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa
85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3,
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3
D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0,
ASWAL
cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL
Date: 2026.02.19 05:26:05 -08'00'
