RAJNEESH DWIVEDI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The jurisdiction of this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been invoked by the petitioner aggrieved by the action of the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (for short "the Commission") in not selecting him for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Physical Chemistry in the Government Degree Colleges of the State. He seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the select-list dated 08.01.2019 issued by the Commission; for a mandamus to declare that the entire selection process, in making appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (Physical Chemistry), is vitiated in law for not following the selection procedure prescribed by the 2010 UGC Regulations; for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to consider his candidature, for selection to the post of Assistant Professor (Physical Chemistry), in accordance with the provisions of the 2010 UGC Regulations; for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to consider his suitability and merit, vis- -vis the private respondents, for the post of Assistant Professor (Physical Chemistry) in accordance with the 2010 UGC Regulations, by providing the benefit of reservation to the reserved category candidates, and selecting them against reserved category posts; and for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to issue appointment letters to the private respondents on the basis of the select list dated 08.01.2019.

(2.) Mr. Subhash Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the petitioner, would fairly state that, in the light of the order of the Division Bench in Madhu Bahuguna vs. Uttarakhand Public Service Commission & others, Judgment in Writ Petition (S/B) No.78 and 82 of 2019 dated 09.01.2020, the challenge to the validity of the selection process, on the ground that it is contrary to the 2010 UGC Regulations, may not survive; and his challenge to the selection process is now confined to the question whether candidates selected in the screening test, under the quota vertically/horizontally reserved in their favour, can be considered for selection, pursuant to the interview held thereafter,against posts in the general category.

(3.) Before examining the contentions urged in this regard, it is necessary to note the facts to the extent relevant. While the petitioner belongs to the general category, respondents 4 to 6 belong to the Other Backward Classes, respondents 7 and 10 belong to the Scheduled Castes, and respondents 8 and 9 belong to the Uttarakhand Women category. While vertical reservation is provided in favour of the Other Backward Classes, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, reservation is horizontally provided in favour of Uttarakhand women.