2025:UHC:9817 SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, r ep or t s, or d er s or p r oceed in g s or d ir ect ion s an d Reg ist r ar ’s or d er w it h Sig n at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS 7 0 5 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, Additional CSC, for the State. (2) Petitioners participated in a selection for the post of Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School in District Chamoli. According to them, 431 vacancies were notified, out of which 215 vacancies were earmarked for science category candidates and 216 vacancies were earmarked for other science category candidates. The case of the petitioners is that 215 vacancies, earmarked for science category candidates, could not be filled up and there were as many as 5 vacancies which remained unfilled in ZBC (Zoology, Botany and Chem istry) subject combination. Petitioners contend that in view of the first proviso to Rule 9 of Uttarakhand State Elementary Education (Teacher) Service Rules, 2012 as amended in 2019, unfilled vacancy in a particular subject combination can be filled by candidates belonging to other subject combination. (3) Petitioners possess B.Tech qualification. Thus they fall under other science category. Petitioners contend that the authorities be directed to fill five unfilled vacancies for ZBC subject combination by candidates belonging to other science category candidates. (4) Learned State Counsel submits that proviso to Rule 9, relied by learned 2025:UHC:9817 Counsel for the petitioners, enables the State authorities to fill unfilled vacancies by appointing candidates from other subject combination, however it does not confer any vested right of appointm ent. Learned State Counsel further subm its that with B.Tech qualification, petitioners belong to other science category, therefore they cannot be adjusted against vacancies earmarked for ZBC or PCM subject combinations. He submits that since other science category is a Class in its, therefore, the grievance raised by the petitioners in this writ petition is without any substance. (5) Be that as it may, since petitioners have sought a writ of mandamus, therefore, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met if petitioners are permitted to approach the competent authority by making a representation. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed by perm itting the petitioners to make representation. If they make representation within ten days from today, the competent authority shall look into the grievance raised by the petitioners and take decision, strictly as per applicable rules, within four weeks thereafter. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 7 .1 1 .2 0 2 5 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2025.11.07 14:00:36 +05'30' 2025:UHC:9817