UKHC010155452024 2026:UHC:6955-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB/634/2024 Nidhi Vedaratna --Petitioner Versus Uttarakhand Public Service Commission and another --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan (through V.C.) and Mr. Hemant Singh Dangwal, Advocates for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Sunil Datt Joshi, Advocate, holding brief of Ms. Menka Tripathi, Advocate for respondent no. 1. 3. Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no. 2. 4. Petitioner participated in a selection for appointment to the position of Assistant Professor (Sanskrit) held by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. Her candidature was rejected vide order dated 17.09.2024, passed by Secretary, Uttarakhand Public Service Commission on the ground that she furnished educational certificates two months after the deadline fixed for that purpose. 5. Petitioner contends that she was initially not shortlisted, however, she was screened in, in the subsequent shortlisting, but she was not informed that she has been shortlisted based UKHC010155452024 2026:UHC:6955-DB on her API score. 6. A supplementary counter affidavit is filed by Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey, Secretary, Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, enclosing therewith notification dated 07.06.2024, which was published in all leading newspapers, whereby the candidates, who were screened in, in the second shortlisting process were asked to supply all educational testimonials, on or before 24.06.2024. 7. Perusal of the said notification indicates that list of candidates, who were shortlisted in the second process of shortlisting, was uploaded in the official website of the Commission, therefore, the contention raised by petitioner that she was not informed about fate of her candidature cannot be accepted. The fact remains that she furnished educational testimonials two months after the deadline fixed therefor, therefore, Commission was justified in not considering her candidature for appointment. 8. Thus, there is no scope for interference. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 06.08.2026 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86D AAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.08.07 11:19:12 +05'30'