Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10041 (UTT)

NEERAJ KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSS/1344/2025 · 2025-09-25

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:8684 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1343/2025 With WPSS/1344/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Gaurav Kandpal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ganesh Dutt Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission/ Selecting Body. 2. Petitioners’ candidature for the post of Assistant Statistical Officer was rejected by the selecting body on the ground that Master’s Degree possessed by them is not as per the requirement of the Rules. Coordinate Bench of this Court had passed interim order directing the selecting body to include the name of the petitioners in the result making process. 3. Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel appearing for Public Service Commission has produced the result of the petitioners which was kept in a sealed cover, which was opened in Court today in the presence of learned counsels for the parties. 4. As per the result, Mr. Gaurav Singh Nagarkoti, petitioner in WPSS No. 1343 of 2025, and Mr. Neeraj Kumar, petitioner in WPSS No. 1344 of 2025 have failed to score 2025:UHC:8684 marks equal to minimum cut off marks fixed for their category. 5. Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel submits that since both the petitioners have been declared unsuccessful based on their performance in the selection process, therefore, the reliefs as claimed in the writ petitions do not survive. 6. Mr. Gaurav Kandpal, learned counsel appearing for petitioner(s) also concedes that since petitioners have not been able to score sufficient marks for inclusion of their name in the select list, therefore, now nothing survives in the writ petitions. 7. Accordingly, writ petitions are dismissed. 8. However, petitioners shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum on the issue of equivalence of qualification possessed by them with the qualification required as per rules. The result produced in Court is resealed and returned back to Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the Commission. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 25.09.2025 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b089 23c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4 BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.09.25 19:26:18 +05'30'