Uttarakhand High Court
WPSB/298/2012 on 21 February, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA
AND
JUSTICE SHRI NARAYAN SINGH DHANIK
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 298 OF 2012
21st FEBRUARY, 2022
Between:
Deepak Sharma S/o Sri Pramod Kumar Sharma, R/o
126 HIG-1 Indirapuram Colony, GMS Road, Dehradun,
Presently working as Accountant in Mussoorie
Dehradun Development Authority, Dehradun.
...... Petitioner
And
1. State Public Service Tribunal, Uttarakhand through its
Registrar, Dehradun.
2. State of Uttarakhand through Principal Secretary,
Govt. of Uttarakhand, Avas Vibhag, Dehradun.
3. The Vice Chairman (VC), Mussoorie Dehradun
Development Authority (MDDA), Dehradun.
......Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. M.C. Pant, learned counsel
Counsel for the respondents : Mr. B.P.S. Mer, learned Standing
Counsel for the State
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made
the following
JUDGMENT: (per the Acting Chief Justice Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2
2) In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought
for a writ of certiorari and prayed that the impugned
judgment and order dated 03.07.2012, passed by the
Public Services Tribunal, Uttarakhand, in Claim Petition
No. 48 of 2007, be set aside, and a rule in the nature of
mandamus be issued directing that the petitioner be
treated as regularly promoted Accountant in terms of the
promotion orders dated 31.01.2005 and 05.01.2009,
and for other consequential relief.
3) In the claim petition, the petitioner prayed
before the Tribunal for quashing of a particular Office
Memorandum, and to direct the Mussoorie Dehradun
Development Authority, Dehradun to make payment of
salary in the pay scale of post of Accountant to the
petitioner from the date of joining, i.e., 01.02.2005.
However, in the meantime, there has been a
development, and respondent No. 2 has by virtue of
letter No. 278 / 2020, dated 26.08.2020, has directed
the petitioner to join as Assistant Accountant in the
same Organization.
4) Thus, the petitioner wants to withdraw the writ
petition with a liberty to file appropriate representation
before the authorities, especially the Respondent No. 2,
3
for consideration of his grievances relating to his
services.
5) In that view of the matter, we hereby dispose
of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to file
an appropriate representation before the respondent No.
2 within twenty-one days from today. The respondent
No. 2 shall consider the representation of the petitioner
on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of
hearing and production of document to the petitioner,
and shall dispose of the same by way of a reasoned
order within sixty days thereafter.
6) With the direction as above, the writ petition
stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
____________________________
SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J.
_____________________
NARAYAN SINGH DHANIK, J.
Dated: 21st FEBRUARY, 2022
Negi
