Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8245 (UTT)

SMT. GANGA JOSHI v. DIRECTOR

WPMS/1023/2017 · 2026-07-13

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010003422017 2026:UHC:5731 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1023/2017 Smt. Ganga Joshi --Petitioner Versus Director and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. No representation for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Pande, Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Akshit Gururani, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Standing Counsel for Union of India. 2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs: “i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to directing the respondent no.3 (Chairman of State level selection committee) to recommend the name of the petitioner before the respondent no.2 (Chairman of Central level selection committee) for "National Florence Nightingale Nurses Award. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus; commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 (Chairman of Central level selection committee) to consider the name of the petitioner also along with other nominee/participant for "National Florence Nightingale Nurses Award 2017 3. Learned State Counsel submits that petitioner is serving as Auxiliary Nurse UKHC010003422017 2026:UHC:5731 Midwife (ANM) in Department of Medical Health of the State. He submits that as per record, nominations for National Florence Nightingale Nurses Award were to be sent to the Central Government on or before 31.03.2017. 4. He submits that this writ petition was filed in 2017; but, no order was passed and the reliefs as claimed by petitioner cannot be granted, as the award for National Florence Nightingale Nurses 2017 were given to persons who were found suitable for that purpose. 5. This Court finds substance in the said submission. 6. Having regard to the pleadings made and reliefs sought in the writ petitioin, this Court is of the considered view that the reliefs as claimed do not survive. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 13.07.2026 Mahinder/