2025:UHC:6822-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI AND HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (S/B) No.31 of 2020 Dr. Rakesh Matura ----Petitioner Versus Uttarakhand Public Service Commission and Another ----Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. G.D. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission- respondent no.1 Mr. Sushil Vashishth, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand- respondent no.2 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari) 1. Petitioner participated in a selection held by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission for the post of Assistant Professor (Zoology). His candidature was rejected only on the ground that his post-graduation is in Biotechnology, which is a different subject altogether. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing/set aside the impugned letter dated 17th January, 2020 so far as it relates to declaring the petitioner ineligible for the post of Assistant Professor (Zoology) contained as Annexure No. 7 to this Writ Petition. 1 2025:UHC:6822-DB (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 to declare the petitioner eligible and permit for interview of post of Assistant Professor (Zoology) which is scheduled to be held on 30th January, 2020 treating Biotechnology is related / allied / relevant/concerned subject of Zoology for the post of Assistant Professor (Zoology).” 2. Coordinate Bench, by interim order dated 29.01.2020, permitted the petitioner to appear provisionally for interview, which was to be held on 30.01.2020. Pursuant to the said order, petitioner participated in interview and his result was kept in a sealed cover. 3. Sealed envelope, containing the result of petitioner was produced in the Court, which was opened in presence of counsel for the parties. Perusal of the result indicates that two candidates belonging to OBC category scored equal marks, i.e., 62, namely, Km. Urvashi and Rakesh Matura (petitioner). 4. Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission submits that Km. Urvashi also filed Writ Petition (S/B) No. 23 of 2020, challenging rejection of her candidature and pursuant to interim order passed by Coordinate Bench, she was also permitted to participate in interview. He submits that the writ petition filed by Km. Urvashi i.e. Writ Petition (S/B) No. 23 of 2020 was disposed of by Coordinate Bench vide order dated 23.02.2024, directing the Selecting Body to 2 2025:UHC:6822-DB refer the issue of equivalence of qualification possessed by her to the Equivalence Committee and depending on the decision taken by the Equivalence Committee, her claim for appointment shall be considered by the Selecting Body. He submits that the Equivalence Committee decided against Km. Urvashi and found that the qualification possessed by her is not equivalent to that which was required. 5. Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission has drawn our attention to the decision taken by the Equivalence Committee, regarding the qualification possessed by the petitioner, which is Annexure No. CA-2 to the Counter Affidavit filed by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. The decision so taken is extracted below: “The Committee discussed the case of Dr. Rakesh Matura, M.Sc. in Biotechnology, who applied for a position of Assistant Professor in Zoology. The Committee is of the opinion that Dr. Rakesh Matura is falling short of many courses which must have been studied at the Masters level so as to make himself eligible for the said post.” 6. Law is well settled that in academic matters, the decision taken by the Experts has to be respected. The Equivalence Committee, which considered the issue of equivalence of qualification possessed by petitioner, is composed of Subject Experts taken from the field of Zoology as well as Biotechnology. Since the Subject Experts have examined the issue and arrived at the conclusion that petitioner’s qualification is not equivalent to Zoology, therefore, we do not find any scope for 3 2025:UHC:6822-DB interference. In such view of the matter, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. 8. Result, which was produced in sealed cover, is re-sealed and is returned back to Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. _______________________________ MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J. ____________________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 04.08.2025 Rajni 4 RAJINI GUSAIN Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db 48448ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1 d9b1f17d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A222 2B4DF4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013 F530616A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2025.08.04 18:11:32 +05'30'