2025:UHC:6610-DB No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPSB No.88 of 2014 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for respondent no.1/Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. 3. Petitioner participated in a selection held for the post of Assistant Engineer/Junior Engineer by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission in the year 2012. Since petitioner was not selected in the selection, therefore, he filed this writ petition in 2014 seeking following relief(s):- “(i) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the selection result dated 22nd January 2014 published by Public Service Commission so far as it relates to the selection of Ms. Nisha Gautam (respondent no.3) for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical /Mechanical) in Jal Sansthan, against the post reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate (woman category), inasmuch as the same is contrary to the Govt. Order and amounts to 100% reservation. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission include the name of the petitioner for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical/Mechanical) in Jal Sansthan against the post reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate.” 2025:UHC:6610-DB 4. No interim order was passed in favour of petitioner. 5. Today when the matter is listed, Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1/Uttarakhand Public Service Commission submits that selection process concluded and recommendation was made to appointing authority by Commission on 22.01.2014 and appointment letters were also issued to selected candidates in 2014, therefore, claim of petitioner do not survive. 6. After going through pleadings and reliefs sought by petitioner, we are also of the opinion that reliefs, as claimed by petitioner, do not survive. 7. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed. 8. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 29.07.2025 SS