Office Notes,

reports, orders

S N L o . .

Date

o o r r d p ir r e o c c t e io e n d s in a g n s d

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

Registrar’s order with Signatures

WPSS 1461/ 2024

Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Sudha Tamta, Advocate, for

the petitioner.

Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, Additional

CSC, for the State.

Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate, for

the respondent no. 2.

(2) Petitioner was denied permission to appear in a selection held by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, on the ground that she has become overage. 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 record and quashing the clause 2(viii)(Age Limit) of the advertisement dated 18^th July, 2024 issued by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, Haridwar (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition), whereby the age limit is prescribed to be between 21 years to 42 years in the Additional Private Secretary

Examination-2024.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or

direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent Uttarakhand Public Service Commission Dehradun to issue Necessary corrigendum to the Advertisement dated 18^th July, 2024 (Annexure No. 2 to the Writ Petition), by providing the relaxation in upper age limit

in favour of the Petitioner.

(iii) Issue a Writ, order or

direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to permit the

Petitioner to participate in the selection of Additional Private Secretary Examination- 2024, pursuant to the advertisement issued on 18^th July, 2024.”

(3) A coordinate Bench, vide order dated 2.8.2024, permitted the petitioner to provisionally appear in the preliminary examination.

(4) Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the Public Service Commission, refers to the averment made in para 5 of the supplementary counter affidavit, filed by Girdhari Singh Rawat, Secretary, Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, where it is stated that petitioner could not qualify Hindi and English typing test, which is mandatory for every candidate to qualify, therefore she cannot be permitted to appear in the further stages of the examination.

(5) Based on the averment made in para 5 of the supplementary counter affidavit, Mr. Ashish Joshi submits that writ petition has become infructuous and it may be dismissed as such.

(6) This Court finds substance in the submission made by Mr. Joshi. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

10.9.2025 Pr P K R U A M B A O R DH DU2sCDe.6TiN a5r g 7ti:4ae 3FAtcl: a,32N =R 2pl C0Iu0 yNo=9mK ss, 13tiob ga. A= 050elnCN7 Hr8eoB2DIdGdEa0 ,b De=y 3C7 C ,2P : O c96R n534 UA =0E0 BfP8T 2 O R9D + D,1 s0 F B H Cta=O A K9'U3D T6 U50TH M E KAA 17URR4BM3 K9aKH4fH8A R0N E2NFD1Dc, 5o, 08u6=H2AIfGCe aC1OA4UBR56T81 aOf03F52eDFb619C8Ad5486