Case Summary: Raja Ram Sahu v. Union of India & Another
Case No.: CWP No. 7020 of 2025 | Decided on: April 30, 2025
Court: Himachal Pradesh High Court
Coram: Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
Background:
The petitioner, Raja Ram Sahu, approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court seeking an additional attempt at the UPSC Civil Services Examination. He argued that his final attempt in 2020 had been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting lockdowns, which hindered his exam preparation. Having started preparing in 2013 and consistently attempting the exam every year, 2020 was his last permissible chance under the existing rules.
Petitioner’s Submissions:
-
Claimed the nationwide pandemic and lockdown restricted his ability to prepare properly.
-
Requested judicial intervention to grant one extra attempt, considering the unprecedented situation.
-
Stressed that his circumstances were beyond his control and merited equitable relief.
Respondents’ Stand:
-
Represented by Mr. Shiv Pal Manhas, the Union of India opposed the plea, arguing that the petitioner had already exhausted all permissible attempts.
-
Emphasized that the pandemic had affected all candidates equally, and many still succeeded despite the challenges.
Court’s Findings:
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel dismissed the plea, ruling that:
-
Mere inability to prepare efficiently due to the pandemic was not sufficient to justify judicial relief.
-
There were no procedural or administrative lapses on the part of authorities to warrant intervention.
-
The petitioner had been appearing for the exam for seven consecutive years and was not entitled to special consideration solely based on subjective hardship.
-
Many candidates had cleared the exam during the same period, proving that the situation was not insurmountable.
The court emphasized that judicial relief cannot be granted based on personal inconvenience when broader rules are uniformly applied. It concluded that the petitioner was seeking an exception without establishing any legal or constitutional grounds.
Conclusion:
The writ petition was dismissed. The court upheld the integrity of the UPSC’s examination framework and ruled that pandemic-related difficulties, in the absence of concrete legal violation or discrimination, cannot be grounds for an extra attempt.
