SANJEEV PANDEY Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. A.M. Saklani, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

(2.) THE petitioner was a candidate for the post of Lecturer (History) in a Government College in the State of Uttarakhand for which selections were made by the State Public Service Commission. Under the reservation policy of the State of Uttarakhand, there was 3% horizontal reservation for such candidates who were physically challenged. Admittedly the petitioner is physically challenged person and he has annexed a certificate to this effect issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Nainital, as Annexure 2 to the writ petition, declaring that the petitioner is 60 per cent physically challenged.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed by the State Public Service Commission, it has been stated that earlier there was an instruction by the State Government that one post of Lecturer (History) shall be reserved for physically challenged person. All the same, subsequently there was no such specific instruction for the reservation and hence no post for physically challenged person in Lecturer (History).