2026:UHC:1633 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS/ 9 9 2 / 2 0 2 3 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Mohd. Azim, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Digvijay Nath Dubey and Mr. Jagdish Singh Bisht, Advocates for the respondent. 2. Supplementary counter affidavit filed by respondent in Court today is taken on record. Petitioner participated in a selection for the post of Assistant Executive in Indian Institute of Management, Kashipur. As per the advertisement dated 26.09.2022, candidates claiming benefit of reservation available to Other Backward Classes, were required to submit OBC certificate issued by competent authority in the prescribed format. 3. Since petitioner’s name did not figure in the final list of shortlisted candidates, therefore, she approached this Court, seeking the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned Final List of Shortlisted candidates for the post of Assistant Executive (Annexure-6) so far it does not include the name of the petitioner. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to include the name of petitioner in Final List of Shortlisted candidates for the post of Assistant Executive and to permit her in appearing in the written examination.” 2026:UHC:1633 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent submits that petitioner had not submitted OBC certificate in the prescribed format; he submits that every candidate claiming reservation available to OBC category had to submit a certificate that he does not fall in the creamy layer, however petitioner failed to meet that requirement, therefore, her name was not included in the final list of shortlisted candidates. 5. Learned counsel for respondent submits that Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit, filed by petitioner was issued on 27.06.2024 which is after the last date of submission of application, pursuant to advertisement issued on 26.09.2022. 6. This Court finds substance in the said submission. Since the caste certificate produced by petitioner was not in the prescribed format, therefore, petitioner’s application was liable to be rejected in view of the specific condition mentioned in the advertisement. 7. Thus there is no scope for interference in the matter. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 11.03.2026 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b089 23c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4 BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2026.03.12 19:10:46 +05'30' 2026:UHC:1633