2026:UHC:2341 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/532/2025 WITH WPSS/531/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. S.S. Chaudhary and Mr. Narayan Dutt, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Since the issue involved in both the petitions is identical, therefore, these are being heard and decided together by this common judgment. However, for brevity, facts of WPSS No. 532 of 2025 alone are being considered and discussed here. 4. Petitioner belongs to Kahar community, which is declared as Other Backward Class (OBC) in State of Uttar Pradesh as well as in State of Uttarakhand. Petitioner was born and brought up in State of Uttar Pradesh and her parents are permanent resident of State of Uttar Pradesh, however, upon marriage, petitioner acquired OBC certificate from State of Uttarakhand. 5. Petitioner participated in a selection for appointment as Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School and she claimed benefit of reservation available to Other Backward Classes. Since she was not selected and recommended for appointment, therefore, petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order in the nature of Certiorari 2026:UHC:2341 quashing the Order dated 28.10.2024 issued by the Secretary of Government of Uttarakhand, respondent no. 1 (Contained as Annexure No. 7 to this Writ Petition) and to further quash the consequential order dated 28.10.2024 issued by Respondent No. 2 (contained as Annexure No. 8 to this writ petition). (ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to issue Appointment Order in favour of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher Primary in District Pauri Garhwal. 6. Learned State Counsel submits that this Court in WPSS No. 462 of 2025 (decided on 12.11.2025) has held that marriage will not improve the status of a candidate and the benefit of reservation would be available only in the State of origin and not in the State to which a candidate migrates on account of marriage. He, therefore, submits that relief No. 1 cannot be granted to the petitioner. 7. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel. Consequently, prayer no. 1, sought in the writ petition, is rejected. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submits that as per the information received by petitioner, last candidate selected in General category scored 75.62 marks, while petitioner’s score was a little less at 75.50 marks. He submits that several candidates belonging to General category, who were offered appointment, have not turned up for joining, therefore, petitioner has a right to be considered against unreserved post. 9. Learned State Counsel submits that if that is so, then petitioner can make representation to the Competent 2026:UHC:2341 Authority, which shall be dealt with as per law. 10. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of by permitting the petitioners to make representation(s) to the Competent Authority. If they make representation(s) within one week from today, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within four months thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J) 02.04.2026 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=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531 726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2026.04.02 07:04:05 -07'00'