Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8117 (UTT)

APARNA SOLANKI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSS/1866/2026 · 2026-07-15

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010122482026 2026:UHC:5860 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Single No.1866 of 2026 15th July, 2026 Aparna Solanki and another ……….Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ……….Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Rajesh Chandra Kandpal, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State. Mr. Gaurav Nagpal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Petitioners have filed the present writ petition challenging the advertisements dated 17.11.2025 and 03.06.2026, annexure no.1 to the writ petition, whereby respondent no.4 invited applications for recruitment on the post of Nursing Officer (Male/Female) in Medical Education Department and Medical Health Department. 2. The ground of challenge is that petitioners want selection to be made on year-wise basis as respondent- Department had done in the earlier occasion in the year 2020 and 2022 3. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 submitted that Uttarakhand Subordinate Nursing (Non-Gazetted) Service Rules, 2015 (Amended in the year 2020) prescribes procedure for recruitment on the basis of written examination, therefore, in pursuance to the aforesaid Rules the impugned advertisements were issued. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 further clarified that on the earlier occasion selection was made on year wise basis only for the reason due to onset of COVID- 19 Pandemic under medical emergency. 1 UKHC010122482026 2026:UHC:5860 5. Since the procedure is prescribed under the Rules of 2015 for selection on the post of Nursing Officer, in such view of the matter the petitioner cannot press upon the respondents to conduct selection on year-wise basis. No legally enforceable right exists in favour of the petitioner. 6. In such view of the matter no interference is warranted. 7. Accordingly writ petition is dismissed in limine. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 15.07.2026 SK 2 SHUBHAM KAPRUWAN Digitally signed by SHUBHAM KAPRUWAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=a29a2f80b93835a432d093afc472d9355959ee0ff878380 c645e17d546a24821, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=B505B049BA2FDAC35E7AE325DEE1505D6C35AF3 D290C229CDC609D61801E1E4F, cn=SHUBHAM KAPRUWAN Date: 2026.07.15 17:07:50 +05'30'