HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 613 of 2024 (S/S) Kamal Kumar ….....Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Another ….….Respondents Present:- Mr. Ketan Joshi and Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Bisht, Additional C.S.C. for the State. Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, Advocate for the respondent no.2/the Commission. JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The respondent no.2/Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission (“the Commission”), on 13.10.2020, issued an advertisement inviting applications for recruitment to the position of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Art) in the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner responded to the advertisement. In the meanwhile, certain service rules were amended by the State of Uttarakhand. Writ petitions were filed and by the judgment dated 15.05.2023, passed in Special Appeal No.78 of 2022, Pushpa Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others; and connected matters (“the appeal”), the Division Bench of this Court struck down the amendment made in the service rules and directed the respondents to initiate the process of recruitment afresh, without any delay. The Commission issued fresh advertisement on 14.03.2024 for the same post, but the cut off date for determining age was fixed as on 01.07.2024. The petitioner is aggrieved by it. 2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that he was eligible for appointment of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Art) when initially on 13.10.2020, applications were invited by the Commission. For no fault of the petitioner, the recruitment process has been cancelled. Therefore, the instant petition has been filed that the condition of determining the age on 01.07.2024 be quashed, and the Commission 2 may be directed to permit the petitioner to participate in the recruitment process. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner responded to the advertisement dated 13.10.2020 issued by the Commission for recruitment to the position of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Art), but that advertisement could not reach to its logical conclusion because in between rules were amended by the State Government; dates for submission of application forms was extended, but, subsequently, those rules were struck down by the Division Bench of this Court by the judgment and order dated 15.05.2022, passed in the appeal. It is submitted that again, fresh advertisement has been issued on 14.03.2024, but for determining age, the cut off date has been changed, and it is fixed as on 01.07.2024, which may adversely affect the prospects of the petitioner in participating in the recruitment process, for no fault of his; in fact, subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the State vide Government Order No.1468/XXIV-B-1/24/01(28)/2024, dated 17.08.2024, had already issued a communication to the Commission that the application forms submitted pursuant to the advertisement dated 13.10.2020, may be considered as valid application forms in response to the advertisement issued on 14.03.2024; the petitioner has been provisionally permitted to participate in the selection process, which is still underway. He further submits that in view of the Government Order No.1468/XXIV- B-1/24/01(28)/2024, dated 17.08.2024, now the respondents may be directed to consider the application of the petitioner, which he had submitted pursuant to the advertisement dated 13.10.2020, issued by the Commission. 5. In the instant matter, despite opportunity having been given, the respondents did not choose to file counter affidavit. In fact, 3 on 16.05.2025, a statement was given on behalf of the State that since the matter pertains to the Commission, no counter affidavit is to be filed. 6. Learned State Counsel submits that in view of the Government Order No.1468/XXIV-B-1/24/01(28)/2024, dated 17.08.2024, the application form that has been filed by the petitioner pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Commission on 13.10.2020, may be considered as a valid application form in response to the fresh advertisement dated 14.03.2024. 7. This proposition has been admitted by learned counsel for the Commission. 8. In view of it, this Court is of the view that the writ petition deserves to be allowed with certain directions. 9. The writ petition is allowed. 10. As per the Government Order No.1468/XXIV-B- 1/24/01(28)/2024, dated 17.08.2024, the Commission is directed to consider the application that has been filed by the petitioner pursuant to the advertisement dated 13.10.2020, as valid application pursuant to the fresh advertisement dated 14.03.2024, issued by the Commission. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 23.07.2025 Ravi Bisht