2025:UHC:6140-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB/34/2020 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. 1. Mr. Anand Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Immanuel Gowan, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Monika Pant, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India. 3. Petitioner participated in a selection for the post of Section Officer (Admin) held by National Institute for the Empowerment of Persons with Visual Disabilities (Divyangjan). Since he was not selected for appointment on the said post, therefore, he has approached this Court, seeking the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the minutes of the selection committee meeting for the post of Section Officer (Admin.) in National Institute for the Empowerment of Persons with Visual Disabilities (Divyangjan) dated 17.01.2020. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to proceed with deno selection person as per the Recruitment Rules and Byelaws. 4. According to petitioner, initially the selection was to be held, based only on performance of a candidate in the interview/vivo voce, but subsequently, the Selection Committee took a decision to hold written examination, which is 2025:UHC:6140-DB wrong, as Rules of the game cannot be changed midway. However, from the pleadings made in para 7 & 8 of the writ petition, it is revealed that petitioner in fact appeared in the written examination. Thus, after appearing in the written examination, he lost the right to challenge the same. 5. Even otherwise also, Mr. Immanuel Gowan, learned counsel appearing for Union of India, on instructions, submits that respondent no. 4, who was selected and appointed in the selection held pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.10.2019, subsequently resigned from the post of Section Officer (Admin) in 2023 and thereafter another selection was held and one Sri Varun Kumar Yadav was appointed as Section Officer (Admin) in place of respondent no. 4. Thus, he submits that in view of these subsequent developments, the writ petition has become infructuous. 6. Be that as it may, since petitioner participated in the written examination, therefore, grievance raised by him against holding of written examination, cannot be entertained. After appearing in the written examination, petitioner is estopped from questioning the selection process. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 15.07.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A585317 26FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.07.15 05:17:59 -07'00' 2025:UHC:6140-DB