2026:UHC:4137 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1327/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. D.S. Patni, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Narayan Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner participated in a selection for appointment as Assistant Teacher (Urdu) in Govt. Primary School, pursuant to advertisement issued on 05.03.2019. Since petitioner was not offered appointment, therefore he has approached this Court, seeking the following relief: “Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to forthwith proceed with filling of the 11 vacant post of Assistant Teacher, Urdu (as a result of issuance of termination of as many as 11 incumbents who were earlier wrongly included by the respondents) from the names of the remaining names of incumbents as per select list/merit list and forthwith issue appointment letter to petitioner on one such post of the recently vacated seats of 11 non deserving incumbents/candidates as per his merit.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that other candidates, who were recommended for appointment pursuant to said selection, were offered appointment vide order dated 07.10.2021. He submits that certain persons, who were offered appointment, were subsequently terminated from service. Thus it is contended that petitioner should be appointed against the vacancies, which have arisen due to termination of service of certain persons. 4. Learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions, as to whether there was any provision for 2026:UHC:4137 waiting list in the selection in question, and if there was such provision, whether any waiting list was prepared or not. Learned State Counsel on instruction submits that waiting list was prepared, however, name of the petitioner does not figure in the waiting list. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner stands immediately below the last selected candidate, therefore he has right to be considered for appointment. 6. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that against dismissal of the writ petitions by Division Bench of this Court, certain persons who were appointed pursuant to same selection approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court and interim order has been passed in their favour protecting their appointment, therefore claim staked by petitioner is without any basis. 7. Without expressing any opinion on the rival contention of the parties, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met if petitioner is permitted to approach the competent authority. 8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of by permitting petitioner to make representation. If petitioner makes representation within one week from today, decision thereupon shall be taken by the competent authority as per law, within six weeks thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 25.05.2026 Mahinder/ 2026:UHC:4137