Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 33 (UTT)

Ravindra Pandey v. State of Uttarakhand

2016-01-15

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate, present for the petitioner. 2. Mr. I.P. Kohli, Brief Holder, present for the State/respondent no.1. 3. Issue notice to the respondent no.2. Steps to be taken within a week. 4. The petitioner was a candidate for the post of District Tourism Development Officer, for which selection is being made by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (in short “Commission”). An advertisement to this effect was issued by the Commission on 04.09.2014 where inter alia qualification for the post of District Tourism Development Officer was that a candidate should be a graduate in tourism/hotel management/mass communication from a recognized University and the candidate should have knowledge of Hindi as well as English. The petitioner admittedly does not have a Degree in hotel management but he has only a diploma of three years from Government Hotel, Management & Catering Institute, Almora. 5. The petitioner has already cleared the preliminary examination yet he has been declared ineligible for the written examination, which is scheduled to be held on 30.01.2016. A declaration to this effect has been made by the commission on 08.01.2016, where the roll number of the petitioner is 651845 against which it has been mentioned that the petitioner does not have requisite qualification. The petitioner on the other hand submits that under the Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board (Group ‘A’ and ‘B’) Service Rules, 2013 the qualification of District Tourism Development Officer are been given under Rule 9 of The Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board (Group ‘A’ and ‘B’) Service Rules, 2013. Therefore, the actual qualification is Degree or Diploma. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further asserts that the Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board (Group ‘A’ and ‘B’) Service Rules, 2013 has not been amended. 7. Prima facie the petitioner has a case. An interference is being called for in the matter by this Court. 8. Let the petitioner be appeared in the mains examination, which is to be held on 30.01.2016, his candidature shall remain provisional and subject to the final determination of the present writ petition. 9. Three weeks time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit. 10. List this matter on 23.02.2016 in the daily cause list. 11. Urgency application (IA No.248 of 2016) stands disposed.