SPA/340/2021
2022 Latest Caselaw 441 UK

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                AT NAINITAL
                        SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.

                                        AND

                             SRI JUSTICE N.S. DHANIK, J.

SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 340 OF 2021

25TH FEBRUARY, 2022

BETWEEN:

Trilok Singh Pal & others .....Appellants. And

State of Uttarakhand & others ....Respondents.

Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, learned counsel.

Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

: Mr. Pankaj Purohit, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following

JUDGMENT :(per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)

The application for condonation of delay is

infructuous as the Stamp Reporter points out that in view of

the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court during the

COVID pandemic, there is no delay in this Special Appeal.

Accordingly, CLMA No. 01 of 2021 stands disposed of as

infructuous.

2. Heard Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, the learned counsel for

the appellants, Mr. K.N. Joshi, the learned Deputy Advocate

General appearing for the State, and Mr. Pankaj Purohit, the

learned counsel for the respondent No.4.

3. A similar issue appeared in Special Appeal No.365

of 2021, "Gopal Datt Chabdal & others vs. State of

Uttarakhand & others", wherein this Court has expressed that

the learned Single Judge took into consideration the various

aspects, and also observed that similar issue has already

been decided by this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No.808 of

2021, "Pratap Dhali & others vs. State of Uttarakhand &

others", and therefore, there is nothing to be decided any

further in this case. This Court further held that the learned

counsel for respondent No.3-Selection Commission brought to

our notice that as per the request of the Department of

Agriculture, because of the reorganization of notification

process, the total requirement of the Assistant Agriculture

Officer were reduced from 280 to 150, therefore, the

notification was issued for the limited number of 150 posts. It

is also not disputed, at this stage, that the Authorities have a

jurisdiction to reduce the total number of posts advertised as

per the requirement and in this case, there appears to be a

reasonable ground to reduce the number of posts advertised

in view of the reduction in the number of the required

personnel from the Agriculture Department.

4. The observation made in the earlier appeal is

application to this case also. Hence, we apply the same

principle and come to the conclusion that there is no merit in

this intra-court appeal. It is, hereby, dismissed.

5. Urgency certified copy of this order be issued to the

parties on proper application.

(S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.)

(N.S. DHANIK, J.) Dated: 25TH February, 2022 NISHANT