Reserved on 08.08.2025 Delivered on 25.08.2025

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition No. 2511 of 2024 (S/S)

Om Prakash and others ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others ….Respondents

Present:

Mr. Abhishek Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Mohit

Maulekhi, Brief Holder for the State.

Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Medical Service

Selection Board.

Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the intervener.

Writ Petition No. 2452 of 2024 (S/S)

Vinod Kumar ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others ….Respondents

Present:

Mr. Susheel Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Mohit

Maulekhi, Brief Holder for the State.

Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Medical Service

Selection Board.

Ms. Seema Sah, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Pharmacy Council.

Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the intervener.

Writ Petition No. 2130 of 2024 (S/S)

Pankaj Mohan Dhyani and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others ….Respondents

Present:

Mr. Pawan Sanwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Mohit

Maulekhi, Brief Holder for the State.

Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Medical Service Selection Board.

Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the intervener.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these writ petitions, they are heard together and being decided by this common judgment. However, the facts of WP (S/S) No. 2511 of 2024 are being referred to, for the sake of convenience.

2. The short question which falls for determination in these writ petitions is as to whether the petitioners, who are Bachelor in Pharmacy (“B.Pharma.”) are eligible for their appointment to the post of Pharmacist, for which the educational qualification is Diploma in Pharmacy (“D. Pharma.”) from a recognized institution and registration with the State Pharmacy Council.

3. The facts necessary to appreciate the controversy, briefly stated, are as follows. The respondent no. 3, Uttarakhand Medical Service Selection Board (“the Board”) by its advertisements dated 16.10.2024 and 19.10.2024 invited applications for the post of Pharmacists (Allopathic) in Labour Department and Pharmacist (Bhesaj) in Medical Department, respectively. As per the advertisement, the educational qualification for the post is that a candidate must possess D.Pharma. from a recognized institution and must also be registered with the Uttarakhand Pharmacy Council. In the case of Pharmacists (Bhesaj), along with D.Pharma, registration was necessary either in Uttarakhand Pharmacy Council or Uttarakhand Pharmacist Registration Tribunal. It is the case of the petitioners that they are B.Pharma. holders, but they have been denied permission to participate in the recruitment process on the ground that only the D.Pharma. holders are entitled to appear in the examination. It is also the case of the petitioners that in the earlier litigation, the State had given an assurance that they would include the qualification of B.Pharma. also for appointment to the post of Pharmacist and the proposal, in fact, has been sent by the Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare of the State Government. It is further the case of the petitioners, that qualification as given in the advertisement is minimum qualification and since the petitioners are higher in qualification, they may not be denied permission for applying to the post of Pharmacists. Therefore, in all these petitions, the petitioners seek direction that the petitioners may be declared qualified and be permitted to appear and fill form in response to the advertisements dated

16.10.2024 and 19.10.2024 issued by the Board.

4. The respondent State has filed its counter affidavit and in para 5 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the Medical Health and Family Welfare Department has no jurisdiction i