IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 167 of 2009 (S/S) Naveen Kathait S/o Sri Gopal Singh Kathait R/o Suman Vihar, Gali No. 3, Near Primary School, Bapu Gram, Rishikesh, Dehradun. ...…………. Petitioner Versus 1. Secretary Medical Health and Family Welfare, State of Uttarakhand. 2. Director General Medical Health and Family Welfare, 107, Chandar Nagar, Dehradun, Uttarakhand. ...…………. Respondents Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the respondents. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner had sought writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to issue admit card to the petitioner for examination for the post of Lab Technician, scheduled to be held on 22nd of February, 2009. 2 2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit, on record. 3) Brief facts of the case are that the respondents issued advertisement dated 16th of September 2008, for recruitment of 130 posts of Lab Technicians. The petitioner’s case is that he sent an application in response to said advertisement with all necessary formalities, but he did not receive the admit card. When he approached the concerned authority before the date of examination to know the reason why the admit card was not issued to him, he was told that on his application photograph was not found pasted. It is stated by the petitioner that photograph might have been misplaced in the office of the respondent, and for that reason he cannot be deprived from appearing in the written examination. 4) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, in which it has been stated that photograph was not found pasted / affixed with the application, as such, it cannot be said that the petitioner had fulfilled the conditions mentioned in the advertisement. 5) Vide interim order dated 20th of February 2009, this Court directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear in the written examination 3 scheduled to be held on 22.02.2009, provisionally. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner appeared in the examination, but his result is now held up. 6) This Court vide its order dated 09.11.2009, directed the respondents to produce the original record pertaining to the case. Today, learned Standing Counsel placed before this Court the original application moved by the petitioner along with the copies of the certificates, annexed with the application. Perusal of the application with naked eyes shows that the photograph affixed on the top of the application appears to have been got detached, as there is some mark of affixation on the application. Besides this, half signature of the candidate, which he must have made after the photograph is attached, are also apparent on the application. Not only this, perusal of the documents filed with the application show that there were two documents, namely a Diploma of Medical Laboratory Technology received from the recognized Government Institute of Public Health and Hygiene, and also certificate of recognition of Uttarakhand State Medical Faculty. Said documents are also filed with the application and both of them bear photo impression of the photograph of the candidate (present petitioner). As such, there could not have been any reason for the petitioner not to affix the photograph on the application, as stated in the counter affidavit. After perusal of the 4 original record brought before this Court, there are strong reasons to believe what has been stated in the writ petition that the photograph was affixed, but it might have been got misplaced in the office of respondent No. 2. 7) In the above circumstances, this Court finds sufficient reason to dispose of the writ petition with the direction that the result of the petitioner relating to the selection process be declared. The direction is issued, accordingly, with consequential benefits, if the candidate is selected in the written examination. The original record produced before this Court is returned to the learned Standing Counsel for the State. (Misc. Application No. 9598 of 2009 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. November 23, 2009. H. Negi