SAKSHAM CHAUHAN v. UTTARAKHAND SUBORDINATE SERVICE SELECTION COMMISSION
Court: High Court of Uttarakhand
Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Uttarakhand judgment dated 2026-04-29. SAKSHAM CHAUHAN v. UTTARAKHAND SUBORDINATE SERVICE SELECTION COMMISSION. Read the judgment and case...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY TH 29 APRIL, 2026 SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 118 OF 2026 Saksham Chauhan …... Appellant. Versus Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission …. Respondent. Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Vinay Kumar and Mr. Ankit Bisht, learned counsel. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Shailendra Nauriyal, learned counsel. JUDGMENT :(per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta, C. J. ) 1. The appellant, who had appeared in selection for various Group ‘C’ posts held by the Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission, filed writ petition before this Court contending that his name is next in the merit list in open category and, in case, the vacancies reserved for Uttarakhand Andolankaries, which have remained unfilled, are filled up, the appellant would get selected. 2.
The Writ Court has taken into consideration the stand of the Selection Commission that in respect of said vacancies, certain clarifications have been sought from the State Government and as soon as the clarifications are received, the Commission would take decision regarding filling up of the remaining vacancies. The Writ Court, having regard to the said stand of the Commission, permitted the petitioner to represent to the State Government and directed the State Government to take decision as per law within four weeks. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that filing of the representation would not serve any purpose, as the complaint filed by the appellant on the My CP Gram Complaints portal has been closed with the comment “this matter noted related uksssc. Please contact with Personnel Department of Uttarakhand”. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent- Commission, on query from the Court, states that the matter is still pending before the State Government. 5.
As the Writ Court has permitted the appellant-writ petitioner to make representation and the State Government has been directed to take decision on the same, therefore, in our considered opinion, the closure of complaint filed by the appellant on My CP Gram Complaints portal, would not come in the way of the appellant in case, any representation is made in compliance of the order of the Writ Court. 6. Accordingly, we find no good ground to interfere with the order of learned Single Judge. The instant special appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J. SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. th Dated: 29 April, 2026 NISHANT
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.