2025:UHC:9231 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1684/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Yogesh Kumar Pacholia and Mr. Sagar Malara, Advocates for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for the respondents. 3. Petitioner participated in a selection for the post of Additional Private Secretary (APS) being held by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. Earlier, he filed a writ petition contending that due to technical glitch in the computer, he could not complete the typing test within stipulated time. This Court, by an interim order passed in WPSS No. 2408 of 2024, had permitted the petitioner to participate in the ongoing typing test again. 4. In this writ petition, petitioner contends that since he was last candidate in the examination hall, where shorthand test was being held, and due to sheer distance between the examiner and him, he could not hear the dictation made by the examiner during shorthand test, consequently, he could not complete the shorthand test within the stipulated time. 5. Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the Selecting Body submits that total 50 candidates were present in the examination hall and none of them, except the petitioner has made any complaint that they could not hear the dictation made by examiner during 2025:UHC:9231 shorthand test and petitioner alone has come before this Court by filing a writ petition. He further submits that shorthand test cannot be held again on mere asking of a candidate, who wants to improve his performance, as it will cause injustice to other candidates. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter, as any interference at this stage would be counter-productive. The Public Service Commission has to complete the selection in a time bound manner and unnecessary interference in the selection process is bound to delay the selection. 7. Even otherwise also, no legal right of petitioner has been violated and only case set up by petitioner is that he suffered inconvenience on account of seating arrangement in the examination hall. Thus, there is no scope for interference in the writ petition. 8. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 15.10.2025 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.10.15 17:47:39 +05'30'