DEEPALI SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. K. Gupta, C. J. Mr. Alok Singh, Senior Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Upadhyaya, Brief Holder for respondent No. 1. Mr. B. D. Pandey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B. D. Kandpal, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

(2.) THE only controversy involved in this case is as to whether reservation of 20% available to women in the selection for Uttaranchal Judicial Services was confined to woman candidates belong ing to Uttaranchal State or was it avail able to all such woman candidates of the country who were otherwise eligible. THE undisputed and un-controverted facts of this case are as under :-

(3.) THERE is no doubt that the peti tioner has been wronged, discriminated against and treated arbitrarily. We have no doubt whatsoever in our minds that as far as the reservation in the category of woman candidates is concerned, it was available to all woman candidates in the country and it was not confined to the woman candidates who were resident of Uttarakhand State. Communi cation dated 24th July, 2006 (Supra) in para (1) thereof did make a reference to the communication dated 18th July, 2001 (Supra) but it incorrectly and wrongly stated that the 18th July, 2001 communication had mentioned only Uttaranchal women candidates for be ing included in the 20% reservation cat egory. We have very carefully seen the communication dated 18th July, 2001 and found that very unambiguously it created a category of woman candidates for providing 20% reservation in their favour. This communication did not at all anywhere specify, lay down or pro vide that the woman candidates for being eligible to avail 20% reservation should be belonging to or be residents of Uttarakhand State. As far as commu nication dated 24th July, 2006 is con cerned, after wrongly mentioning the aforesaid fact in para (1), at para (2) even though it increased the women's reservation from 20% to 30% and for the first time did indicate and mention about the woman belonging to Uttaranchal State, it also at the same time clearly stated that this 10% increase in reservation with respect to the woman candidates belonging to Uttaranchal State shall not be applicable in such cases where the selection process has already begun and the advertisements have been published before the issuance of this communication.