Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12193 (UTT)

VIKAS KUKRETI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSS/1847/2023 · 2025-09-08

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:7945 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1741/2023 With WPSS/1807/2023, WPSS/1830/2023 and WPSS/1847/2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Himanshu Aswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pankaj Semwal, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, Advocate for the petitioner in WPSS No. 1807/2023. Mr. Dinesh Gahatori, Advocate holding brief of Mr. I.P. Gairola, Advocate for WPSS No. 1830/2023. Mr. Narayan Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for the Commission through video conferenincg. 2. Uttarakhand Public Service Commission invited applications for appointment as Review Officer and Assistant Review Officer. The upper age limit prescribed for general category candidates was 42 years. 3. Since petitioners had crossed the upper age limit, as indicated in the advertisement, they approached this Court seeking direction to Selecting Body to grant relaxation in the upper age limit on the ground that earlier selection for the post in question was held in 2016 and thereafter not a single selection was held and on account of this delay, petitioners crossed the upper age limit. 2025:UHC:7945 4. Pursuant to an interim order passed by coordinate Bench of this Court, petitioners were provisionally permitted to participate in the preliminary examination. 5. Mr. Ashsih Joshi, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission points out that result of preliminary examination was declared on 29.02.2024 and petitioners were declared unsuccessful. A statement to this effect has also been made by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission in the counter affidavit. 6. Since petitioners were declared unsuccessful, even though they were permitted to participate in the preliminary examination, therefore relief as claimed by petitioners do not survive. 7. The Writ Petitions are, accordingly dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 08.09.2025 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=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2 B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.09.09 18:38:35 +05'30'