2026:UHC:4222 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/851/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. K.N. Joshi, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari calling for the records and setting aside the appointment of the private Respondent on the post of Assistant Teacher (Other than Science subject), Government Primary School, District Uttarkashi under EWS category pursuant to the Advertisement dated 07th November, 2025 (Annexure No.01 to the Writ Petition) inasmuch the said Respondent has lower quality marks than the Petitioner and has been offered Appointment,. (ii) Issued a writ, order direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent Appointing Authority to consider the Candidature of the Petitioner, based on his educational, training and other eligibility, for appointment on the post of Asst. Teacher (Other than Science subject) Govt. Primary School, District Uttarkashi, under EWS category as per merit of quality marks of the Petitioner, against the vacancies of the advertisement dated 07th November, 2025 (Annexure No.01 to the Writ Petition).” 4. It is not in dispute that petitioner participated in a selection for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School in District Uttarkashi and he claimed 2026:UHC:4222 benefit of reservation available to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). According to petitioner, he was called for document verification/ counselling, however, his name was not recommended for appointment only because he could not produce certified copies of certain documents, which were required to be produced, in terms of Clause-N & O of notification dated 10.01.2026. 5. Learned State Counsel submits that the documents, which were required to be produced by every candidate at the time of document verification, have been mentioned in para 7 of the counter affidavit dated 18.05.2026, filed by Mr. Amit Kotiyal, District Education Officer (Elementary), Uttarkashi. Para 7 of that counter affidavit is reproduced below:- “7. That as per clause N of notification dated 10.01.2026, which provides that the candidates, who participating in present selection process on the basis of D.El.Ed. training (2017-2019) (in service training) from NIOS will be required to submit certified documents related to their employment in the relevant school for which they were trained during the training period from 10th August, 2017 to 31st March, 2019, otherwise their selection will not be considered.” 6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that counselling/document verification was scheduled for 12.01.2026 and the notification was uploaded in the evening of 10.01.2026, and 11.01.2026 being a holiday, there was no time available to petitioner to get certified copy of attendance register and other documents from the school, where he taught while pursuing D.El.Ed. course through distance mode 2026:UHC:4222 from NIOS. He further submits that candidates with lower score of marks were recommended for appointment and they have been appointed against vacancies reserved for EWS candidates. Thus, it is contended that the appointment of less meritorious candidate be set aside and petitioner be directed to be appointed. 7. Learned State Counsel, per contra submits that despite notice, petitioner did not produce the necessary certificates from the school, where he allegedly taught during the period he pursued D.El.Ed. training from NIOS, therefore, the competent authority was justified in not recommending petitioner’s name for appointment. Learned State Counsel further refers to the stipulation made in the notification dated 10.01.2026, where it is provided that candidate, who fails to produce requisite documents at the time of counselling, then their claim for appointment shall not be considered. Thus, it is contended on behalf of the State Government that petitioner himself is to be blamed for the situation he is in, therefore, petitioner is not entitled to any relief and the selection and appointment of respondent no. 4 cannot be disturbed at the instance of petitioner. 8. Without going into the merits of the rival contentions raised on behalf of the parties, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met, if petitioner is permitted to approach the competent authority by making representation. 2026:UHC:4222 9. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of by permitting petitioner to make representation to the competent authority. With the representation, petitioner shall enclose all necessary documents, duly certified by the competent authority in Modern Public School, Bazpur, as mentioned in Clause-O & N of the notification dated 10.01.2026. If petitioner makes representation within ten days from today, the competent authority shall look into the matter and take decision, as per law, within six weeks thereafter. If petitioner’s representation finds favour with the competent authority, then the competent authority shall consider offering appointment to petitioner, if otherwise found eligible, against an unfilled vacancy in appropriate category. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 27.05.2026 Navin