IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1039 OF 2009 (SS) Gokul Chand ……………Petitioner. Versus Additional Director General of Police (Administration), Uttarakhand Police & Others. ……….Respondents. Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand. 27th October, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Petitioner was a constable in Uttarakhand Civil Police. His services were terminated on 17.4.2009 by the respondent no. 3. Against the order of termination the petitioner filed an appeal, which was also dismissed by the respondent no. 2 on 11.8.2009. Now as per the averment in the writ petition, on 18.8.2009 the petitioner has preferred a revision before the respondent no. 1 i.e. Additional Director General of Police (Administration), Uttarakhand Police, Police Head Quarter, Dehradun, which is still pending since August, 2009. The prayer in the writ petition is that the direction be given to the respondent no. 1 to decide the revision expeditiously and further not to evict the petitioner from the official accommodation till such a revision is decided. As far as first prayer is concerned, the same is allowed and the revisional authority i.e. respondent no. 1 is directed to decide the revision of the petitioner pending 2 before him as expeditiously as possible. However, regarding the second prayer for directing the respondent no. 2 to allow the petitioner to retain the official accommodation, this Court is not inclined to interfere and this prayer is rejected, although this issue may also be decided by respondent no. 2. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 27.10.2009 Rathour