2025:UHC:2195-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA 25TH MARCH, 2025 SPECIAL APPEAL No. 26 OF 2025 Anchal Saini …Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand And Others …Respondents Counsel for the appellant. : Ms. Sukhwani Singh, learned counsel. Counsel for the State. : Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. Counsel for respondent no.5 : Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel. JUDGMENT : (per Sri G. Narendar, C.J.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent no. 5. 2. The learned Single Judge, by the order impugned in the Special Appeal rendered in WPSS No. 1977 of 2024, has been pleased to accept the case of the respondent that the exercise requires to be re-done in view of the fact that the roster point fixed in the earlier notification is erroneous, and that the roster point requires to be re-done for the selection process to be completed without any dispute being raised. 1 2025:UHC:2195-DB 3. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent would submit that, pursuant to the directions issued by the learned Single Judge, the Director, Secondary Education, has looked into the roster point, and now the error, in the roster point, fixed in the earlier notification, is now in the process of being corrected; and that the learned Single Judge has directed the publication and commencement of a fresh selection process; that the direction issued, in no way, prejudices the appellant. 4. That apart, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the 5th respondent that the appellant had failed to even make an application and the application filed by the appellant is scanned copy and not the original issued by the office. 5. In that view of the matter, the order not being prejudicial to the interest of the appellant, and no concrete steps having been taken pursuant to the publication, inviting applications from prospective candidates, the order of the learned Single Judge, in our opinion, does not warrant any interference. 6. Accordingly, the reasoned order of the learned Single Judge is sustained, and the Special Appeal is 2 2025:UHC:2195-DB disposed of with liberty to the appellant to make an application and participate in the selection process. _______________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. _________________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 25th March, 2025 UJJWAL 3