2026:UHC:1918 SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, r ep or t s, or d er s or p r oceed in g s or d ir ect ion s an d Reg ist r ar ’s or d er w it h Sig n at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS/ 7 0 2 / 2 0 2 6 W PSS/ 6 6 9 / 2 0 2 6 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari and Mr. Radha Krishna Aithani, Counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Shushil Vashistha, Standing Counsel, for the State. Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, Advocate, for the selecting body. (2) Since common questions of fact and law are involved in both the writ petitions, therefore, these are being heard and decided together by this common judgment and order. However, for brevity, facts of WPSS No. 702 of 2026 alone are being considered and discussed here. (3) Petitioner served in Indian Army and retired as Sepoy in 2018. Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission issued advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Personal Assistant and Stenographer in different government departments. Petitioner responded to the said advertisement and participated in the selection process. (4) It is not in dispute that petitioner claimed benefit of reservation available to Ex- Servicemen. As per the provision contained in U.P. Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependants of Freedom Fighters and Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993, Ex-Servicemen are entitled to reservation to the extent of 5 per cent in State services. Since petitioner’s name did not figure in the list of successful candidates in the written examination and, according to petitioner, not a single person belonging to Ex-Servicemen category was selected or recommended for appointment, 2026:UHC:1918 therefore, he has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief: “I. A writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to call the petitioner under GEN-Ex Army Quota, for “Stenography & Typing Test” required for the post of “Personal Assistant”, in terms of letter dated 11.8.2021 & 20.12.2021 and GO dated 18.2.2021 (Annexure-7 & 8).” (5) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that selection process consists of written examination followed by type/ shorthand test. He submits that as many as four vacancies were reserved for Ex- Servicemen, however only seven candidates were declared successful in the written examination, who were called for type/ shorthand test. He submits that since none of the candidates, who were called for type/ shorthand test, has been able to clear the test, no candidate belonging to Ex-Servicemen category has been declared successful. (6) Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, learned Counsel appearing for the selecting body, submits that benchmark fixed for candidates, other than SC and ST, in the written examination was 45 per cent; since petitioner was not able to touch the benchmark of 45 per cent marks in the written examination, therefore, he was not called for type/ shorthand test. (7) Learned Counsel for the petitioner then refers to a Government Order dated 18.2.2021. In para 3 of the said government order, it is provided that in case sufficient number of candidates belonging to Ex- Servicemen category are not able to compete for Group C or Group D posts, then without compromising the efficiency, the general standard for appointment may be relaxed to such an extent that the reservation quota available to them is fulfilled. 2026:UHC:1918 (8) Learned Counsel for the selecting body, however, submits that para 3 of the government order referred to above is vague and it does not enable the selecting body to relax the cut-off marks. He further submits that para 3 provides for relaxing the general standard and whether the cut-off marks would also come within the meaning of general standard or not is debatable. (9) Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact that the State Government alone is competent to relax the conditions in terms of para 3 of the Government Order dated 18.2.2021, writ petitions are disposed of by permitting the petitioners to make representation to the State Government. If petitioners make representation within ten days from today, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within six weeks thereafter. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 1 9 .3 .2 0 2 6 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C9 1957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.03.20 12:52:03 +05'30' 2026:UHC:1918