High CourtsDivision Bench(2022) 03 UK CK 0015

Lakhendra Gauthiyal vs Uttarakhand Public Service Commission

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 2 March 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J · Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 398 Of 2014

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 271 words

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J

1) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2) In this writ petition, the present petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs : -

i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the selection of private respondent Beer Singh on the post of Dy. S.P.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to declare the petitioner successful and selected on the post of Dy. S.P. under the Scheduled Caste Category quota.

iii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

iv) Award the cost of the petitioner.

3) It is apparent from the record that the petitioner, being a Scheduled Caste Category candidate, participated in the PCS / Subordinate Services Examination 2010. The petitioner passed out the written examination, and also faired well in the personality test / interview, but he was not given appointment on the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on medical ground, as on medical examination, he was found to be knocked knee.

4) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the opinion that this case involves complicated question of fact, which can not be gone into by the court exercising writ jurisdiction, and in the meanwhile, the petitioner has been selected for public service in a different examination. So keeping in view the aforesaid consequences, we do not find it appropriate to continue the litigation.

5) Hence, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.

6) There shall be no order as to costs.