Sikkim High Court
WP(C)/73/2025 of Dr. Ruchita Bhujel Vs State of Sikkim and Ors. on 12 December 2025
COURT OF SIKKIM Record of Proceedings Page 1 of 2 WP(C) No.73 of 2025 DR. RUCHITA BHUJEL PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF SIKKIM AND OTHERS RESPONDENTS Date: 12.12.2025 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE For Petitioner For Respondents 1, 3, 4 & 5 2 Ms. Neha Gupta,
Court No.2
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
Record of Proceedings
WP(C) No.73 of 2025
DR. RUCHITA BHUJEL
PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF SIKKIM AND OTHERS
RESPONDENTS
Date: 12.12.2025
CORAM : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
For Petitioner
For Respondents
1, 3, 4 & 5
Ms. Neha Gupta, Advocate.
Mr. Thinlay Dorjee Bhutia, Government Advocate.
Ms. Pema Bhutia, Assistant Government Advocate.
Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Senior Advocate.
Mr. Bhusan Nepal, Advocate.
ORDER
1. On Mention Memo being filed by the Respondent No.1 on 11-12-2025, this matter is taken up today.
2. I.A. No.02 of 2025 is an application filed on behalf of the Respondent No.2, Sikkim Public Service Commission (SPSC), seeking disposal of the instant Writ Petition.
3. It is submitted by Learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No.2 that, this Court vide Order dated 18-11-2025, in I.A. No.01 of 2025, had directed the Respondent No.2 to permit the Petitioner to appear for the Viva-Voce which were scheduled to take place on 18-11-2025, 19-11-2025 and 20-11-2025. In compliance to the Order of this Court, the Petitioner was allowed to appear for the Viva-Voce and her interview conducted on 20-11-2025 along with other candidates. The final results of the said selection process is yet to be declared by the Respondent No.2. That, as all the prayers of the Petitioner before this Court were to permit her to appear in the Viva- Voce which has accordingly been complied with, this Writ Petition has thereby become infructuous and is liable to be disposed of. 2025:SHC:166
Court No.2 HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Record of Proceedings
Page 1 of 2
4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner having been allowed to appear in the Viva-Voce, in terms of the prayers made in the Writ Petition and the I.A. No.01 of 2025, she has no objection to the submissions advanced by the Learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No.2.
5. Considered submissions.
6. In light of the foregoing submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of as nothing further remains for adjudication.
7. In such circumstances, nothing restrains the Respondent No.2 from declaring the final results of the selection process.
8. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
Judge 12.12.2025 ds/sdl
2025:SHC:166
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…