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) 1942

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
DINESH CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


2. Petitioner is a person with benchmark disability. He is challenging advertisement dated 30.12.2025 issued by Uttarakhand Public Service Commission for the post of Lecturer. By said advertisement, 725 vacancies on the post of Lecturer in different subjects were advertised. Petitioner is eligible for the post of Hindi and Sanskrit for which 78 and 62 vacancies respectively have been advertised.

3. Petitioner contends that even though three vacancies were reserved for persons with disability in Hindu subject and two vacancies were reserved for such persons in Sanskrit subject; however, distribution of such vacancy amongst different vertical categories was not indicated in the advertisement.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner belongs to General Category and he apprehend that all the vacancies which are reserved for persons with disability in Hindi and Sanskrit subject would be eaten away by persons belonging to SC or ST category.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the roster issued by State Government vide G.O. dated 22.05.2020.

6. Learned State Counsel, per contra submits that as per provisions of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2017, person

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