COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL (i) Writ Petition (S/S) 2999/2001 (Old No. 7169 / 1997) Rajendra Singh Sharma, S/o Sri S.C. Sharma, Lab-Attendant, Met. Engineering Department, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, District Hardwar. …….Petitioner Versus 1. Registrar, University of Roorkee, District Hardwar. 2. Rajiv Singh Hooda, S/o L.S. Hooda, Solani Kunj, University of Roorkee, District Hardwar. …..Respondents Sri Lalit Belwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri Rahul Kansal, learned Counsel for the University. With (ii) Writ Petition (S/S) 2996/2001 (Old No. 19755/1997) Rajiv Singh Hooda, S/o L.S. Hooda, Solani Kunj, University of Roorkee, Roorkee-247667, District Hardwar. ……Petitioner Versus 1. University of Roorkee, Through its Roorkee. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Roorkee University, Roorkee. 3. Shri Karan Singh, S/o Shri Dharam Singh, R/o House No. 147/8, Vikas Nagar ‘D’ Colony, University of Roorkee, Roorkee. …..Respondents Sri V.K. Bisht, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri V.K. Kaparwan, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri Rahul Kansal, learned Counsel for the University. 28th February, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Since the dispute involved in both these writ petitions are interlinked and are based on similar set of facts, therefore, both the petitions are being decided by this common order. 2. The University of Roorkee has now been converted into a national institute and the Director of the institute is the head of the institution. Therefore, the petitioners are directed to file appeal before the Director and the Director after taking into account all the allegations and ignoring the previous decision shall decide their appeals afresh by a speaking and reasoned order and in accordance with the provisions of the existing rules. 3. With the aforesaid direction, both the petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) Prabodh HIGH COURT OF UTTARACHAL AT NAINITAL Delay Condonation App. No. 13075 of 2006 REVIEW PETITION NO. 263 of 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2999 (SS) OF 2001 Rajendra Singh Sharma, S/o Sri S.C. Sharma, Lab-Attendant, Met. Engineering Department, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, District-Hardwar. …………..Petitioner. Vs. 1. Registrar, University of Roorkee, District-Hardwar. 2. Rajiv Sigh Hooda, S/o Sri L.S. Hooda, Solani Kunj, University of Roorkee, District-Hardwar. ………….Respondents. Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Present review application has been filed for reviewing the order-dated 22082006 along with an application for condonation of delay. 2. Cause shown for delay in filing the review application is condoned. 3. A perusal of the order dated 22nd August, 2006 shows that there is a dispute with regard to the appointment for the post of Lab Technician in pursuance of the recommendation of the selection committee dated 12.02.1997. It appears that the matter relates to the year, 1997 and the Uttaranchal State was formed in 2000. Roorkee University has set up the screening committee. In place of University it has been converted into Indian Institute of Technology and the Director is the Incharge. 4. The petitioners, therefore, are directed to make necessary amendments in the writ petition by impleading the IIT and Director as necessary party. 5. In view of the aforesaid, order dated 22nd August, 2006 is recalled. Review application as well as Application for condonation of delay is allowed. 6. Let the writ petition be listed before the appropriate Court for disposal. Writ petition shall not be treated as tied up before me. Applications are allowed. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 20.11.2006 Rathour IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2999 (SS) OF 2001 Rajendra Singh Sharma, S/o Sri S.C. Sharma, Lab Attendant, Met. Engineering Department, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, District – Haridwar. ………..Petitioner. Versus 1. Registrar, University of Roorkee, District-Haridwar. 2. Rajiv Singh Hooda, S/o Sri L.S. Hooda, Saloni Kunj, University of Roorkee, District-Haridwar. ………Respondents. Sri Yogesh Pandey, Adovcate for the petitioner. Sri V.K. Bisht, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Sri Sushil Vashish & Sri Balvinder Singh Thind, Advocate for the respondents. & WRIT PETITION NO. 2996 (SS) OF 2001 Rajiv Singh Hooda, S/o Sri L.S. Hooda, R/o House No. 193/4, Solanikunj, University of Roorkee. …………..Petitioner. Versus 1. University of Roorkee, Roorkee, through its Registrar. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Roorkee University, Roorkee. 3. Shri Karan Singh, S/o Shri Dharam Singh, R/o 147/8, Vikas Nagar, ‘D’ Colony, Roorkee University, Roorkee. ………Respondents. Sri V.K. Bisht, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Sri Sushil Vashisth, & Sri Balvinder Singh Thind, Advocate for the petitioner. Sri Yogesh Pandey, Advocate for the respondent. Dated: 22.08.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard counsel for both the parties at length.. 2. By the present writ petition (No. 2999 (ss) of 2001), the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no.1 not to appoint the respondent no. 2 on the post of Lab Technician in pursuance of the recommendations made by the selection Committee on 12.02.1997 and to consider the claim for appointment of the petitioner on the aforesaid post in accordance with the rules. 3. Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointment as Lab Attendant on 28.05.1981 in the University of Roorkee, Roorkee, District Haridwar. Thereafter, on 27.08.1996, a notification was issued by the University inviting applications from qualified persons for the post of Laboratory Technician for which the minimum qualifications were also prescribed. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he fulfils all the requisite qualifications for being appointed on the aforesaid post. Petitioner has submitted that Screening Committee consisting of the Head of the Department was constituted and thereafter, the screening committee has included the name of one Sri Rajiv Singh Hooda/respondent no. 2 in the list of the candidates, who was appointed on 26.07.1988 as a ministerial assistant in the O.I.D.B. and till date he has not been made permanent on this post and he has not been found to be suitable for the post of Laboratory Technician. A panel for appointment for the post of Lab Technician has been prepared, where Rajiv Singh Hooda has found place at Serial No. 1, one Sri Karan Singh at Sl. No. 2 and the petitioner has got place at Serial No. 3. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 1/IIT by filing a fresh representation within a period of two weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. If such a representation is filed, the same shall be decided by the authority concerned in accordance with rules within four weeks thereafter after giving full opportunity to both the parties. Writ Petition No. 2996 (ss) of 2001 6. Subject to the final decision of the aforesaid representation filed by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2999 (ss) of 2001, present writ petition is disposed of. 7. Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 22.08.2006 Rathour