Vineet Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors.

(per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.)

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 21.08.2026 in WPSS No.1529 of 2026, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the Final Select List for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, District Pithoragarh dated 01.06.2026, and for a mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the appellant on the post of Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School in District Pithoragarh under the General Category, has been dismissed.

The case of the appellant is that he participated in the selection process for the post of Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School in pursuance of an advertisement issued in this regard by the respondents. As per the advertisement, the appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher Primary School was to be made purely on the basis of quality point marks obtained by the candidates and no written examination or interview was prescribed.

According to the appellant, his application was scrutinized by respondent no.3 and was found to be in conformity with the conditions stipulated in the advertisement. He was called for counseling on 12.01.2026, wherein his name figured at Serial No.203 and his quality point marks were shown as 81.50. However, his name did not figure in the Final Select List issued by respondent no.3, whereas candidates who had secured marks lower than 81.50 marks, were included in the list. This led to the filing of the writ petition by the appellant challenging the validity of the Select List.

It appears that before the learned Single Judge, the respondents took the stand that the name of the appellant was not included in the Select List as he had concealed that he possessed a Permanent Resident Certificate issued by the State of U.P., showing him to be permanent resident of Tehsil Dhampur, District Bijnor.

The respondents further asserted that a uniform policy decision had been taken that if any candidate is found having Permanent Resident Certificate of any other State along with that of the State of Uttarakhand, he would stand disqualified. Consequently, the appellant was also declared ineligible and his name was not included in the Select List.

The learned Single Judge, on the basis of the said stand of the respondents, held that a candidate participating in the selection process was required to comply with the eligibility conditions and, since a candidate possessing Permanent Resident Certificate of any other State was ineligible to participate in the selection process, therefore, the candidature of the appellant has rightly been cancelled and accordingly the writ petition has been dismissed.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition merely on the basis of the instructions placed during the course of argument, without giving any opportunity to the appellant to rebut the same. It is submitted that the appellant has brought on record as Annexure No.5 the certificate relied upon by the respondents which merely records him as ordinary resident of Tehsil Dhampur, District Bijnor.

It is contended that the said certificate is not a certificate of permanent residence of the appellant. The appellant was born on 08.07.1989 in Village Puranpur, Post Nadehi, Tehsil Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar and is permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand. A certificate in this regard was duly produced by the appellant before the respondents.

According to the appellant, in the year 2019, he went to the State of U.P. and resided in a rented house in Village Navada Saidpur Jalal, Tehsil Dhampur, District Bijnaur and also took his education (D.El.Ed) from Lokmani Memorial Degree College, Kadarabad Khurd, Seohara, Bijnaur (U.P.). For obtaining education, the appellant obtained Ordinary Resident Certificate, which according to him, is different from a Permanent Resident Certificate.

The contention of learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant is that in similar circumstances the Director, Elementary Education, Uttarakhand vide order dated 07.09.2026 in respect of Hempal Singh and Others had held that, merely on the basis of Ordinary Resident Certificate, it cannot be concluded that the person is permanent resident of the State of U.P. nor that the person had played any fraud until an inquiry in this regard is duly conducted. He submits that in the instant case, the respondents without holding any inquiry cannot take the stand that the appellant is a permanent resident of the State of U.P.

Learned State Counsel concedes that the certificate on which reliance was placed by the respondents records that the appellant as ordinary resident of Tehsil Dhampur, District Bijnor, and does not, in terms, certify him as a permanent resident of the State of U.P. The question whether a person is permanent resident of any other State requires inquiry and, merely on the basis of Ordinary Resident Certificate, it cannot be concluded that he is not permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand when, in fact, such a person does possess a certificate to the said effect issued by the competent authority of the State of Uttarakhand.

As such question cropped up during the course of hearing, it out to have been decided after giving an opportunity to the appellant to rebut the stand of the respondents. As no such opportunity was granted to the appellant, therefore, we are unable to uphold the order of learned Single Judge. It is, accordingly, set aside. The matter is remitted back to the writ court for deciding the writ petition afresh after giving proper opportunity to the appellant to rebut the stand of the respondents.

Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.