2025:UHC:7796 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/485/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mohd. Shafy, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner is serving as Revenue Sub-Inspector in District Dehradun. The next promotional post available to Revenue Sub-Inspector is Supervisor Kanoongo; however, before promotion, Revenue Sub-Inspector has to undergo requisite training in Patwari Training Institute. 4. Rule 17 of U.P. Subordinate Revenue Executive (Supervisor Kanungos) Service Rules, 1977 lays down the procedure for selection for training, which reads as under:- “Rule 17 (1) Procedure for selection-For purpose of selection from amongst permanent Lekhpals for admission to the Institute the following procedure shall be adopted: (a) The Board shall intimate by the first day of March every year the Commissioners the number of candidates to be nominated from each division; (b) The nominations of candidates shall, in the first instance, be made by the collector who shall sent his nominations to the Commissioner in the form given in Appendix ‘D’ by the first day of June of the year. (c) The Commissioner shall consider the cases of all the Lekhpals nominated by the 2025:UHC:7796 Collector of the districts within the division. He shall, out of the names recommended by the Collector, nominated from his division as many candidates as may have been required by the Board under clause (a) of sub-rule(1) above and shall arrange their names in order to seniority. He shall send the list of the nominated candidates, along with their character rolls, to the Board by the first day of July of the year. (2) The Collector and the Commissioner, while submitting their nomination to the Commissioner and the Board respectively, shall also send a list of all the Lekhpals, if any, who have been superseded, giving reasons for such supersession. (3) The candidates shall finally be selected by the Board for admission to the Institute. If the Board considers it necessary that any or all the candidates on the list received from the Commissioner should, before selection, be called for interview, it may call such candidates for the purpose.” 5. According to petitioner, by virtue of seniority in the cadre of Revenue Sub- Inspector/Lekhpal, he is entitled to be nominated for training, however, his name has not been included in the list of selected candidates even though juniors to him have been included. It is further his case that there is no adverse material against him, for denying right to be sent for training to him. 6. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: (i) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the list prepared by the respondent no. 2 for the purpose of training of “Revenue Inspector” dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure no. 1 to the petition), by which the name of the petitioner has not been included in the list of eligible candidate for getting training of Revenue Inspector in anticipation of the promotion to the post of Revenue Inspector. (ii) To issue a writ order or direction in the 2025:UHC:7796 nature of certiorari quashing of format-4 dated 10.09.2024 issued by the respondent no. 3 by which the respondents have illegally denied to include the name of the petitioner in the list of eligible candidates for the purpose of training of Revenue Inspector (Annexure no. 2 to this petition) (iii) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the list dated 28.03.2025 of eligible candidates for the purpose of training of Revenue Inspector of 18th batch, which is commencing from 0104.2025 and show his name before the name of Mr. Kunwar Singh. The respondents may further be directed to promote the petitioner on the post of Revenue Inspector along with other candidates whose names are mentioned in the list of 28.03.2025. 7. Learned State Counsel submits that as per Rule 16 of the aforesaid Rules, criteria for selection of Lekhpals for admission to the Institute shall be seniority, subject to rejection of unfit. Learned State Counsel further submits that a disciplinary inquiry is in progress against the petitioner, which was initiated in terms of order passed by State Information Commission. 8. This submission, however, is disputed by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, who refers to a communication issued by Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Doiwala on 24.07.2024 in which it is mentioned that one Mr. Sudhir Saini – Revenue Inspector alone was found responsible for the lapse and warning was issued to him and clean chit was given to petitioner. 9. Since there is no clarity on the point, whether there is any disciplinary inquiry pending against the petitioner, after issuance of letter dated 24.07.2024 2025:UHC:7796 by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Doiwala, therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to District Magistrate, Dehradun to examine petitioner’s claim for nomination and if it is found that alleged disciplinary proceeding, referred to in para 5 of the counter affidavit, has concluded and petitioner has been exonerated, then petitioner’s name shall be considered for inclusion in the list of Revenue Sub-Inspector, who are nominated for training, as per his Seniority. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J) 02.09.2025 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=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85 f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D2 6F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.09.04 04:25:35 -07'00' 2025:UHC:7796