Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6617 (UTT)

DR. PRADEEP KUMAR v. VICE CHANCELLOR

WPSB/500/2017 · 2025-08-18

Ashish Naithani, Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No. Dat e Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB No.500 of 2017 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. B.P.S. Mer, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Petitioner participated in a selection held by Gurukul Kangari University, Haridwar for the post of Assistant Professor (Veda). His application, however, was rejected on the ground that his score of marks in Graduation is less than 50%. 4. Petitioner made representation against rejection of his application, which was rejected, vide order dated 15/16-06.2017, passed by Registrar, Gurukul Kangari University, Haridwar. The ground taken for rejecting petitioner’s representation was that 5% relaxation in cut-off marks can be given only to candidates belonging to reserved category, whereas, petitioner does not belong to any of the reserved categories. 5. The ground taken for rejecting the petitioner’s representation cannot be faulted. Unless the rules so permit, the standard fixed for shortlisting cannot be relaxed for a candidate belonging to General Category. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that selection process concluded long back and candidate recommended by the Selection Committee were appointed and his appointment is challenged by some of the candidates, therefore, the relief as claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition do not survive. 7. The writ petitioner is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. (Ashish Naithani, J) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J) 18.08.2025 NR/