2025:UHC:2434 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Bench No. 447 of 2025 26th November, 2025 Vishal Saini and Others ……………..Petitioners Versus Uttarakhand Public Service Commission ………...Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Pakaj Miglani, learned counsel for respondent/Commission. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram : Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioners challenge Clause 18–Very Important Instructions, Clause 17(c)(12)–Important Instructions for the Candidates concerning Examination, and Clause 18(22)–General Instructions of the advertisement dated 30.01.2025 issued by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (the Commission), whereby the candidates have been informed that the method of scaling shall not be applicable in the preparation of the result of the Mains Examination; the petitioners further assail the decision of the Commission dated 08.01.2025, whereby, the candidates have been informed that the method of scaling could not be applicable in preparation of result of the mains examination; the petitioners, therefore, seek a writ of 2025:UHC:2434 mandamus directing the respondent-Commission to implement the method of scaling of marks in the Mains Examination of the Combined Examination-2025 in terms of Regulation 6(i) of the Regulations-2022, particularly when the said provision has been applied by the Selecting Body in previous examinations for the same post as well as in other examinations. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The respondent Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (“the Commission”) issued an advertisement on 31.01.2025 (the advertisement dated 30.01.2025) inviting applications from eligible candidates for participating in Assistant Conservator of Forest, Logging Officer and Forest Range Officer Combined Examination- 2025 (“the Combined Examination”). The controversy in the present writ petition pertains to Clause 18 of the Important Instructions, Clause 17(c)(12), and Clause 18(22) of the advertisement dated 30.01.2025, wherein it has been provided that the method of scaling would not be adopted in the preparation of the result of the main examination, and that the result of the examination/selection would be prepared on the basis of the original marks obtained by the candidates. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, having fulfilled the educational 2025:UHC:2434 qualifications prescribed in the advertisement, participated in the examination; that one of the candidates had submitted a representation to the respondent-Commission regarding the removal of the scaling of marks of the optional subject from the examination, but no action was taken thereon. 5. He would further submit that the respondent- Commission has already promulgated the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission procedure for Preparation of Examination Result Regulations-2022 (Regulations-2022), under Section 11(1) of the Uttar Pradesh State Public Service Commission (Regulation of Procedure) Act, 1985 (“the Act”). Part V of the Regulation of 2022 deals with the concept of scaling, and Regulation 6 deals with method of scaling wherein it has been specifically mentioned that in any examination, where the candidates have option to choose one or more optional subject then in order to maintain equality in the difficulty level of different subjects, the method of scaling would be adopted, but, in the advertisement for the Combined Examination, this scaling has been denied, therefore, those conditions of the advertisement as well as the decision of the Commission dated 08.01.2025 have been questioned whereby it has been decided that the scaling pattern shall not be applied while preparing the merit list of candidates. 6. The respondent-Commission has filed its 2025:UHC:2434 counter-affidavit stating that on 08.01.2025, the Commission took a decision recorded at point no. 151, which reads as under: “In view of the potentially low number of candidates in the optional subjects of the Assistant conservator of Forest, Logging Officer, and Forest Range Officer Combined Examination-2025, it has been decided that the scaling method shall not be applied in the main examination. The examination/selection result shall be prepared based on the actual marks obtained by the candidates in their respective papers. This fact shall also be mentioned in the advertisement.” 7. It is the case of the respondent-Commission that, pursuant to the aforesaid decision, the Commission incorporated the impugned conditions in the advertisement dated 30.01.2025, which are now under challenge. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that scaling is a method employed to ensure equality in the distribution of marks, keeping in view the different optional subjects and the level of difficulty in attempting such questions. He would contend that the Regulations-2022, which have statutory force, expressly provide for the application of scaling method, and Regulation 22 of the Regulations-2022 authorizes the Commission to amend the Regulations from time to time. It is submitted that no such amendment has ever been made, and instead, the Commission has merely taken an administrative decision on 08.01.2025, which is arbitrary. It is argued that even before issuance of the advertisement, the Commission concluded that there would be a ‘potentially low number of 2025:UHC:2434 candidates’. It is argued that how the Commission could anticipate the number of candidates for an examination for which the advertisement had not yet been published. Moreover, it is urged that an administrative decision cannot supersede the Regulations and the Regulations could have been amended as per Regulation 22 of Regulations-2022. 9. Learned counsel for the Commission submits that on 08.01.2025, the Commission took a decision that, keeping in view the potentially low number of candidates in the optional subjects, the scaling method shall not be applied. 10. The issue is quite simple. Under the Act, the Commission has framed the Regulations-2022, which provides for the application of scaling method in examination involving optional subjects. It is an admitted position that the examination in question includes optional subjects. 11. Regulation 22 of the Regulations-2022 empowers the Commission to amend the Regulations from time to time. Admittedly, no amendment has been made to the Regulations, which expressly provide for application of the scaling method in examinations involving optional subjects. The decision dated 08.01.2025, taken on the administrative side, which is much prior to the issuance of advertisement and the decision is based “keeping in view the fact that low number of candidates would apply”. The decision dated 2025:UHC:2434 08.01.2025 of the respondent-Commission cannot be upheld for the following reasons:- (i) The decision is contrary to Regulations-2022 which have been enacted under the statutory authority by the Commission itself. (ii) An administrative decision cannot override the mandate of the Regulations-2022. (iii) On 08.01.2025, the Commission did not have any prospective number of candidates, which could have compelled the Commission to take a decision for non-application of scaling method. There is no material placed on record, which could justify the beginning line of the resolution dated 08.01.2025, where it is written that ‘in view of the potentially low number of candidates in the optional subject’, 12. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 13. The writ petition is allowed. 14. The decision of the Commission dated 08.01.2025, whereby it was decided that the method of scaling could not be applicable in the preparation of the main examination is hereby quashed. 15. Similarly, Clause 18 under the heading Very Important Instructions, Clause 17(c)(12) under the heading Important instructions and Clause 18(22) under the 2025:UHC:2434 heading General Instructions of the Advertisement dated 30.01.2025 are hereby quashed. 16. The Commission is directed to issue a corrigendum categorically informing all candidates that the scaling method shall be applied in the mains examination of the Combined Examination in accordance with the Regulation-2022. (Alok Mahra, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 26.11.2025 26.11.2025 Mamta