Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/3708/2017 of Nitu Rana Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS on 29 December 2017
3708 of 2017 U.C. Dhyani, J. Mr. V.P. Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Dabral, Standing Counsel for the respondent State. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs, among others: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Arguments
WPSS No. 3708 of 2017
U.C. Dhyani, J.
Mr. V.P. Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Dabral, Standing Counsel for the respondent State.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs, among others: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the appointment order dated 01.08.2015 of private respondent no. 6 on the post of Sahaika at Aganbari Center, Village Badogi Khera-Bhankoli, District Uttarkashi. (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the appointment order dated 01.08.2015 of private respondent no. 6 on the post of Sahaika at Aganbari Center, Village Badogi Khera-Bhankoli, District Uttarkashi.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Sahaika at Aganbari Center, Village Badogi Khera-Bhankoli, District Uttarkashi. nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Sahaika at Aganbari Center, Village Badogi Khera-Bhankoli, District Uttarkashi.
After arguing the writ petition at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer only to the extent that the representation (Annexure 7 to the petition) of the petitioner may kindly be directed to be decided by respondent no. 2, in accordance with law, at an early date.
The prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is worth accepting.
Learned counsel for the respondent State has no objection to such an innocuous prayer.
Writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent no. 2 to decide the representation (Annexure 7 to the petition) of the petitioner after hearing the petitioner and respondent no. 4 (affected parties), in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks of presentation of certified copy of this Order along with a copy of said representation.
Needless to say that the decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner.
Let copy of the order be supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner today itself on payment of usual charges.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.)
29.12.2017