RITU AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND THREE OTHERS
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Heard Sri Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N.S. Pundir, learned Brief Holder for the State and Sri Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri G.D. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent No. 4. The Court has also heard Sri Sharad Sharma, learned Senior Counsel, who was requested to assist the Court. The Director, Treasury and Finance Services, Government of Uttarakhand, issued an advertisement, inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment on the post of Assistant Accountant in all the government treasuries/sub-treasuries in the State of Uttarakhand. The total number of posts advertised were 175 and it was mentioned in the advertisement that the posts could be increased or decreased on or before the declaration of the result. The advertisement indicated that 9 posts were advertised for District Udham Singh Nagar, out of which 7 posts were for general category. The advertisement indicated that reservation would be given to eligible candidates as per the reservation policy issued by the State Government and that the horizontal reservation would also be applicable to Uttarakhand Women to the extent of 30%.
(2.) The petitioner, being eligible as a woman candidate in the general category, applied for the post of Assistant Accountant from Udham Singh Nagar, under the quota prescribed for Uttarakhand Women. The petitioner appeared in the written examination and qualified, which was published in the newspaper on 21st April, 2011. The petitioner was shown at serial No. 16 of the merit list. On 10th June, 2011, the petitioner was intimated that she was required to appear in the computer test. The petitioner appeared and qualified again in the computer test. A final merit list was prepared in which 4 male and 1 woman candidate were selected September, 2011 from the Office of the Chief Treasury Officer, Udham Singh Nagar, intimating the petitioner that 7 posts are vacant in the said Office and that 1 post was reserved for general category woman. The petitioner being aggrieved by the reduction of the vacancies and reserving only 1 seat in the woman category, approached this court, praying that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to allocate 2 posts for women candidates from the general category posts and accordingly rectify the final select list, and the petitioner was kept in the waiting list under the general women category. The petitioner moved an application seeking information regarding status of the vacancies in Udham Singh Nagar and was informed by the Chief Treasury Officer, Udham Singh Nagar that there are only 5 posts for general category candidates, out of which 1 post was reserved for a woman candidate. Subsequently, the petitioner received a communication dated 29th.
(3.) According to the petitioner, she obtained 140.75 marks and another candidate Surjit Kaur received 141.50 marks. According to the petitioner, the advertisement clearly indicated that the vacancies could increase or decrease on or before the declaration of the result and in no case the vacancies could be altered after the declaration of the result.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.