2025:UHC:6070-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceeding s or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB 97/2020 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. Mr. Avidit Noliyal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Sushil Vashistha, Brief Holder, for the State. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate, for the respondent no. 3. (2) Petitioners responded to an advertisement issued by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, whereby applications were invited for appointment as Assistant Professor in various degree colleges within State of Uttarakhand. Petitioners applied for the post of Assistant Professor (History). Their candidature were rejected on the ground that they are not eligible for appointment as Assistant Professor (History) as Masters Degree possessed by them is of a different branch. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “I. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's qualification i.e. Master of Arts (MA) in Ancient History, Culture and Archaeology issued by Gurukul Kangri Haridwar eligible for the post of Assistant Professor History and accordingly a fresh interview of the petitioners. I(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 14.2.2020 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) issued by Secretary Uttarakhand Public Service Commission Haridwar, whereby the representation of the petitioners has been 2025:UHC:6070-DB rejected. II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents not to issue any appointment order to any of the candidates for the post of Assistant Professor History on the basis of instant selection process.” (3) Learned State Counsel submits that application for impleading successful candidates, who were appointed, was moved by petitioners and the same was allowed by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.8.2020, however petitioners did not take steps for effecting service on those candidates who were impleaded. (4) Office report dated 21.11.2020 supports the said contention made by learned State Counsel that steps were not taken by petitioners for effecting service on those successful candidates who were impleaded in this writ. (5) Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned Counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, submits that selection process concluded long before filing of the writ petition. He submits that State Counsel had made a statement before the coordinate Bench of this Court on 6.7.2020 that all successful candidates have been appointed. (6) Upon conclusion of the selection process, the relief as prayed in this writ petition, cannot be granted. Thus the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to question the eligibility criteria, due to which they were declared ineligible for the post of Assistant Professor (History), in an independent proceeding. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 14.07.2025 Pr 2025:UHC:6070-DB