WPSS/3719/2017 of Laxman Singh AND OTHERS Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS on 29 December 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition No. 3719 (S/S) of 2017

Laxman Singh & others .…… Petitioners

versus

State of Uttarakhand & others

……. Respondents

Mr. B.M. Pingal and Mr. Amar Shukla, Advocates for the petitioners. Mr. Anil Dabral, Standing Counsel for the State / respondents.

U.C. Dhyani, J. (Oral)

By means of present writ petition, the petitioners seek following reliefs, among others:

i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 11.12.2017, passed by respondent no. 3. certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 11.12.2017, passed by respondent no. 3.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to re-determine the inter-se-seniority quathe petitioners on the post of Cooperative Inspector, Grade II / A.D.O. (Cooperative) strictly as per the governing Seniority Rules. mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to re-determine the inter-se-seniority quathe petitioners on the post of Cooperative Inspector, Grade II / A.D.O. (Cooperative) strictly as per the governing Seniority Rules.

iii)

Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for promotion on the post of Cooperative Inspector, Grade I / A.D.C.O. from the date when their counterpart have been given promotion and direct the respondent authorities to pay all consequential benefits as has been given to the counterpart of the petitioners.

iv)

Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents first to finalize / re-determine the correct seniority list then to proceed with the departmental promotion.

2) After arguing the writ petition at some length, learned counsel for the petitioners confined their prayer only to the extent that the representation of the petitioners for re-determining their inter-se-seniority on the post of Cooperative Inspector, Grade II / A.D.O. (Cooperative) may kindly be directed to be decided by respondent no. 3, strictly in accordance with Rule 8 and 9 of the Uttarakhand Government Servant Seniority Rules, 2002, at an early date.

3) The prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners is worth accepting.

4) Learned counsel for the respondent State has no objection to such an innocuous prayer.

5) Writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent no. 3 to decide the representation, to be moved by the petitioners, for re-determining their inter-se-seniority on the post of Cooperative Inspector, Grade II / A.D.O. (Cooperative), after hearing the affected parties, strictly in accordance with Rule 8 and 9 of the Uttarakhand Government Servant Seniority Rules, 2002, afresh. If the petitioners are found eligible for promotion, their case shall be considered for promotion on the post of Cooperative Inspector, Grade I / A.D.C.O., within a period of eight weeks of presentation of certified copy of this Order along with a copy of such representation.

6) Needless to say that the decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioners.

7) Let copy of the order be supplied to learned counsel for the petitioners today itself on payment of usual charges. [Stay Application no. 17235 of 2017 also stands disposed of.]

(U.C. Dhyani, J.)

Dt. December 29, 2017.Negi