IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 71 of 2014
Sunil Kumar & another ………. Petitioners
Versus
Uttarakhand Public Service Commission
& another ……..Respondents
With
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 76 of 2015
Manoj Kumar Chaudhary ………. Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ……..Respondents
With
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 81 of 2015
Atul Kumar Lapar ………. Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & another ……..Respondents
With
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 95 of 2015
Dr. Kuldeep Singh ………. Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & another ……..Respondents
Present:
Mr. Vinay Kumar, Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Mr. M.S. Bisht, Ms. Puja
Banga, Advocates for the petitioners.
Mr. V.B.S. Negi, learned Additional Advocate General with Mr.
Subhash Upadhyaya, learned Chief Standing Counsel, for the State
of Uttarakhand.
Mr. B.D. Kandpal, Advocate, for the Uttarakhand Public Service
Commission.
Coram :
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J.
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioners before this
Court have challenged the
reservation being given to the Rajya Andolankaris in these
writ petitions.
2. According to the petitioners, such reservation is not
permissible under the Constitution or law presently
enforced in the State of Uttarakhand.
2
3. The Division Bench of this Court had passed the
following orders on 17.03.2
015 which reads as under:-
“Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Chief Standing Counsel
for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 1.
Mr. B.D. Upadhyay, Advocate for respondent no.
2.
It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner
that vide judgment and order dated 11.05.2010
passed in WPSS No. 945 of 2007 (Karunesh Joshi
Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others) and
connected petition, learned Single Judge was
pleased to quash the Government Order dated
11.08.2004 whereby reservation was made for
Rajya Andolankaris; thereafter, review petition
was filed before learned Single Judge against the
judgment and order dated 11.05.2010, however,
considering the importance of question of law
raised in the review petition, learned Single Judge
was pleased to direct that review application may
be treated as PIL; consequently, matter was
registered as WPPIL No. 67 of 2011; the Division
Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.08.2013
was pleased to admit the petition restraining the
State Government from giving any further
appointment on the basis of the policy whereby
decision was taken to give reservation to Rajya
Andolankaris.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further
contends that order dated 26.08.2013 is still in
force and the Division Bench of this Court in
WPSB No. 71 of 2014 again vide order dated
01.04.2014 was pleased to stay the reservation
given to the Rajya Andolankaris, therefore,
neither the State Government nor Public Service
Commission can provide reservation to the Rajya
Andolankaris under the garb of any Government
order, which itself is in violation of orders passed
by Division Bench of this Court.
Learned counsel for the respondents seeks and
are granted ten days’ time to file counter affidavit.
In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case, we direct that effect and operation of the
result of preliminary examination declared on
03.02.2015 shall remain stay.
Identical questions of law are involved in WPPIL
No. 67 of 2011 and WPSB No. 71 of 2014,
therefore, list this petition along with WPPIL No.
67 of 2011 and WPSB No. 71 of 2014 on the date
fixed.
CLMA No. 2499 of 2015 stands disposed of
accordingly.”
4. In this case, arguments
are already underway. Today
the matter was fixed for furth
er argument. However, this
3
Court has been informed by the learned Additional
Advocate General Mr. V.B.S. Negi that the State
Government had already passed the Bill which is though
waiting the assent of his Excellency the Governor of
Uttarakhand, therefore, he
prays for adjournment in the
matters till the said Bill takes the shape of an Act.
5. The matter is adjourned.
6. List this matter on 30.11.2
015 in the daily cause list.
7. Meanwhile, the learned counsel for the Uttarakhand
Public Service Commission Mr. B.D. Kandpal says that in
view of the interim order of
this Court dated 17.03.2015,
the entire selection pro
cess have been stalled and
subsequent actions are to be taken by the Uttarakhand
Public Service Commission a
fter the declaration of the
preliminary result such as holding the main examination
which are stalled.
8. In view of the above,
we modify the interim order
dated 17.03.2015 which shall be applicable in all the above
writ petitions. We permit the Uttarakhand Public Service
Commission to further proceed in the matter. They shall
prepare the supplementary list
showing the names of such
candidates who would have qualified for the main
examination in accordance with their marks had there been
no reservation for them. The benefit granted to the “
Rajya
Andolankaris
” by the reservation, may also be provisionally
given, till the main examination. However, the final result
shall not be declared, as it will be subject to the final
determination in these writ petitions.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.)
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
)
16.11.2015 16.11.2015