SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 708043

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
VIKRAM SINGH – Appellant
Versus
UTTARAKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION – Respondent
WPSS 2277 / 2024



Office Notes,

reports, orders or proceedings

SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

No.

and Registrar’s

order with Signatures

WPSS/ 2277/ 2024

Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Sagar Kothari, Advocate for the

petitioner.

Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the

respondent.

2. Petitioner participated in a selection for the post of Surveyor in Government Industrial Training Institute and he was declared

successful in the preliminary examination.

3. As per applicable norms, every candidate who is declared successful in preliminary examination has to appear before the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (for short “Commission”) for document verification upto a certain date and only those candidates, who appeared for document verification, are

permitted to participate in mains examination.

4. Since petitioner could not appear for document verification within the deadline, indicated by Commission, therefore, he was denied permission to appear in the mains examination. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following

reliefs:

“(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature

of certiorari, quashing the order dated 21-11-2024 passed by respondent, rejecting the petitioner's request for being granted an opportunity for document

verification in the Government Industrial Training Institute Foreman Instructor Examination-2023 (Annexure No. 5 to this writ petition).

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding/directing the respondent to grant an opportunity to the petitioner for participating in the document verification process of the Government Industrial Training Institute Foreman Instructor Examination-2023.”

5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that in the website, although there were two folders for document verification; however, the deadline was not indicated in any of the folder.

6. Per contra, Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel appearing for the Commission refers to para 5 of the counter affidavit where it is stated that last date for document verification was communicated to all candidates by issuing advertisement in two newspapers, namely, Hindustan (Hindi daily) and Dainik Jagran (Hindi daily) on 10.10.2024.

7. He further submits that SMS were also sent to all candidates who qualified preliminary examination and information regarding deadline was also updated in the website. Thus he submits that it is the petitioner alone who is to be blamed for this fiasco.

8. Mr. Miglani, relies upon a judgment dated 04.09.2025, rendered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1460 of 2025 (SS), for contending that identical issue was decided and the relief was denied to a similarly situate candidate, who

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top