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

2026 Supreme(Online)(UK) 1533

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
DEEPAK JOSHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings S N L o . .

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS and Registrar’s order with Signatures WPSS/ 702/ 2026 WPSS/ 669/ 2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari and Mr.

Radha Krishna Aithani, Counsel for the petitioners.

Mr. Shushil Vashistha, Standing Counsel, for the State.

Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, Advocate, for the selecting body.

(2) Since common questions of fact and law are involved in both the writ petitions, therefore, these are being heard and decided together by this common judgment and order. However, for brevity, facts of WPSS No. 702 of 2026 alone are being considered and discussed here.

(3) Petitioner served in Indian Army and retired as Sepoy in 2018. Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission issued advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Personal Assistant and Stenographer in different government departments. Petitioner responded to the said advertisement and participated in the selection process.

(4) It is not in dispute that petitioner claimed benefit of reservation available to Ex- Servicemen. As per the provision contained in U.P. Public Services (Reservation for Physically H

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top