Uttarakhand HC Stayed a Government Order that Provided a 30% Reservation to Domiciled Women in State services

Case: Pavitra Chauhan v State

Court: A Division Bench of Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice RC Khulbe

The Uttarakhand High Court stayed a government order (GO) that provided a 30 percent reservation to domiciled women in State services. The bench along with the 2006 GO, allowed the petitioners to appear in the main examination.

The petitioners challenged the GO because it created an Unreserved Uttarakhand Mahila Category with lower cut-off marks for women from the State.

It was contended that the reservation denied them from appearing in the main examination as they couldn't clear the prelims despite getting more marks than women who could avail of the reservation. The State government did not have the power to provide domicile-based reservations, and the Constitution only allows reservations based on domicile, only by a law enacted by Parliament.

The counsel argued that the order violated Articles 14, 16, 19, and 21 of the Constitution, as all the petitioners have secured more marks than the cut-off provided in the preliminary examination.

It was stated that all the petitioners were women and they were facing discrimination by the State. In the petition, it is alleged that the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission advertised 224 vacancies for various posts in 31 departments by way of a notification dated August 10, 2021, advertising the Uttarakhand Combined State (Civil)/Pravar Sub-Ordinate Service Examination 2021. Moreover, it is mentioned under Clause (8) of the advertisement notification that horizontal reservation would not be applicable to women who were not domiciled in the State.