2026:UHC:1492 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/3190/2017 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for respondent no. 1. 3. Mr. N.K. Papnoi, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 2. 4. Mr. K.P. Upadhyaya, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Hemant Pant, Advocate for respondent nos. 3 to 9. 5. Petitioners participated in a selection for appointment to the post of X-ray Technician. The said selection process was initiated vide advertisement dated 20.02.2016, issued by Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission. The written examination was held on 28.05.2017; result whereof was declared on 23.10.2017 and petitioners were declared unsuccessful. 6. According to the petitioners, they had scored more marks than the cut off marks fixed by the Selecting Body, however, they were declared unsuccessful on the premise that every candidate was required to obtain minimum cut off marks in both the papers of each subject. Pleading to this effect is made in paragraph no. 13 of the writ petition. 7. A counter affidavit is filed by Mr. Santosh Badoni on behalf of the Selecting Body. Paragraph No. 3-B and 3-D of the said counter affidavit are reproduced 2026:UHC:1492 below:- “B. That in order to maintain the quality and standard of the selected candidates and to ensure merit the respondent Commission took a decision and as per the decision the candidates are required to get minimum 45% marks in each paper (General/ O.B.C.) category, 35% of S.C./S.T. category. Such decision has been taken by the respondent Commission unanimously in its meeting convened for the said purpose. True/photo copy of the relevant part of the decision of the Commission is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No. CA-1 to this affidavit. D. That the petitioners could not get 45% marks in each paper and consequently they were declared unsuccessful.” 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that neither in the advertisement nor in the Recruitment Rules applicable for the post in question, there is anything to indicate that one has to secure more than minimum cut off marks in each paper of any subject and the only requirement is of securing the minimum cut off marks fixed for a particular category. He relies upon a judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 358 of 2017, in which identical issue was decided. 9. Mr. B.D. Pande, learned counsel appearing for the Selecting Body and Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3 to 9 concede that the issue involved in this writ petition has been decided by Division Bench in Special Appeal No. 358 of 2017. 10. In such view of the matter, the present writ petition is decided in terms of the judgment dated 22.04.2025 rendered in Special Appeal No. 358 of 2017. The Selecting Body is directed to recommend name of the petitioners for appointment, if they are otherwise entitled for such recommendation, as per their score of marks in their respective categories. If 2026:UHC:1492 name of the petitioners is recommended by the Selecting Body, then the Appointing Authority shall take necessary steps for issuing appointment orders to the petitioners, within three months from the date of receipt of recommendation from the Selecting Body. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 09.03.2026 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=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a1 31bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D 653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.03.11 11:16:45 +05'30'