✦ High Court of India · 07 May 2025

Naveen Chandra Joshi Pet it ioner v. S.K. Nailwal

Case Details High Court of India · 07 May 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
07 May 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,410 words

St at e of Ut t arakhand and ot her s -------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence: - Mr. I .P. Gairola, Advocat e for t he pet it ioner Mr. Ut t arakhand/ respondent Nos. 1 & 3. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocat e for t he Ut t arakhand Public Service Com m ission/ respondent No. 2. Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocat e for respondent No. 2. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Th e Co u r t m a d e t h e f o l l o w i n g : JUDGMENT: ( p e r H o n ’ b l e Ju s t i ce Sr i M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i ) St anding Counsel St at e t he

1. Pet it ioner applied t he post of Assist ant Professor ( Zoology) pursuant t o an advert isem ent issued by Ut t arakhand Public Service Com m ission on

04.12.2011. Since pet it ioner ’s nam e did not figure in t he list of successful candidat es prepared by t he Com m ission and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were select ed for appoint m ent as Assist ant Professor ( Zoology) , t herefore, pet it ioner has t his writ pet it ion seeking t he following reliefs: - “ i) I ssue a writ order or direct ion in t he nat ure of cert iorari t o quash t he select list so far relat es t o t he respondent no.4 and 5 and quash t he order dat ed 4.1.2017 passed by respondent no.2 ( Cont ained as Annexure No.11 t o t his writ pet it ion.. I ssue a writ order or direct ion ii) t he nat ure of m andam us direct ing t he respondent s t o prepare a fresh select list of candidat es for t he post of Assist ant Professor Zoology so far relat es t o t he pet it ioner and respondent no 4 and 5. I ssue a writ order or direct ion iii) m andam us direct ing appoint m ent let t ers of respondent no.4 and 5. respondent s t he t he nat ure of t he t o 1 I ssue a writ order or direct ion t he nat ure of iv) m andam us declares t he appoint m ent of t he respondent no.4 and 5 null and void. I ssue a writ order or direct ion t he nat ure of v) m andam us direct ing t he pet it ioner as a select ed candidat e for t he post of Assist ant Professor Zoology and issue appoint m ent let t er t o t he pet it ioner for t he post of Assist ant Professor Zoology.” respondent s t o declare t he

2. According t o pet it ioner, he possessed Post Graduat e Degree in Zoology wit h Ph.D Degree from a recognized Universit y and he was also having NCC “ B” & “ C” cert ificat es, t herefore, he had a preferent ial right of appoint m ent , com pared t o respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

3. Mr. Anand Swaroop, Secret ary, Ut t arakhand Public Service Com m ission has filed count er affidavit in which it is st at ed t hat out of t ot al 22 vacancies on t he post of Assist ant Professor ( Zoology) , 7 were unreserved; 3 candidat es, nam ely, respondent Nos. 4, 5 and t he pet it ioner scored equal m arks, since all of t hem possessed preferent ial qualificat ions m ent ioned in Rule 9 of t he applicable service rules, t herefore, t he candidat e who was older in age was select ed and recom m ended for appoint m ent . Para 7, 8 and 9 of t he count er affidavit , filed by Ut t arakhand Public Service Com m ission are ext ract ed below: - “ 7. That in reply t o cont ent s of para no 11 t o 19 of t he Writ Pet it ion it is st at ed t hat in t he int erview 3 candidat es nam ely Shankar Mandal, Nit in Bhardwaj respondent no. 4 and 5 respect ively and Naveen Chandra Joshi, Pet it ioner t hem possessed scored equal 69 m arks and all of preferent ial qualificat ion as m ent ioned in relevant service rules at rule no.9 as such all of t hem st anding at equal foot ing in such a sit uat ion who will be at t ained higher in rule no. 6.6 of m erit Ut t arakhand Public Service Com m ission Exam inat ion Result Preparat ion Procedures Rules 2012 which provides t hat when t wo and m ore candidat es scored equal m arks t hen t he candidat es who possessed t he preferent ial qualificat ion will be kept higher in m erit list , however, when 2 or m ore candidat es possessed equal m arks and also possessed t he it has been provided at 2 equal preferent ial qualificat ion also prescribed rules 6.6. of Result Preparat ion Procedure Rules 2012 will be applied. possessed

8. That in cont inuat ion in preceding para it is subm it t ed t hat in such a sit uat ion w here t he recruit m ent is t o be done by way of int erview only t he procedure prescribed in rules 6.6 ( C) ( I and I I ) will applied which provides t hat if t wo or m ore candidat es secure equal m arks in int erview t he candidat es older in age will be kept higher in m erit list and in case t wo or m ore candidat es also have t he sam e age t hen t he m erit list will be arranged in accordance t o English alphabet ical order. True copy of Exam inat ion Result Preparat ion Procedure Rules 2012 is being filed herewit h and m arked Annexure C.A No.1 t o t his affidavit . qualificat ion preferent ial t hen

9. That it is st at ed t hat t he respondent no. 4 and 5 being older in age t hen t he pet it ioner as such in view of rules 6.6 of Exam inat ion Result Preparat ion Procedure Rules 2012, t heir nam e has been kept higher in m erit list and declared successful. Since only 7 post were available for General Candidat es and out of which t wo post were Horizont ally reserved for Ut t arakhand Fem ale candidat es as such despit e scoring equal m arks t o t he last select ed candidat es pet it ioner could not be declared in t he final result list .”

4. Since t he course of act ion adopt ed by Select ing Body, i.e. Ut t arakhand Public Service Com m ission is as per Result Preparat ion Procedure Rules, fram ed by t he Com m ission in 2012, t herefore, t his Court does not find any reason t o int erfere in t he m at t er.

5. The writ pet it ion t hus fails and is dism issed. _______________________________ M A N OJ K UM A R TI W A RI , J. __________________________ A SH I SH N A I TH A N I , J. Dt : 7 t h May, 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=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH 3

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments