HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 40 of 2003 (SB) Miss Pratibha Goswami d/o late Sri Chetan Giri r/o Giri villa, Tibri Madhya Marg, Ranipur Modh, Haridwar …….. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. The Secretary, Department of Woman Empowerment and Child Development, Dehradun 3. Director, ICDC Dehradun 4. Zila Karyakram Adhikari, District Haridwar ……………. Respondents Dated: 27.3.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri D.S. Patni counsel for the petitioner and Standing counsel for the respondents. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 13.1.2003 passed by the respondent no. 4, Zila Karyakarm Adhikari, Haridwar, whereby the petitioner was relieved from Uttar Pradesh and was directed to join at Lucknow. Briefly stated the petitioner was appointed on the post of Chief Supervisor in the year 1995 and since then she has been posted in District Haridwar. Pursuant to creation of the State of Uttaranchal options were invited and the petitioner has given option of the State of Uttaranchal. However, vide order dated 13.6.2002, the respondent directed to petitioner to relieve from Haridwar for Lucknow with immediate effect. The petitioner has preferred a writ petition No. 22 of 2003 before the High Court challenging the order dated 13.6.2002,which is still pending. The petitioner has submitted that her mother made a representation on 19.6.2002 to respondent no. 2 and requested him to stay the relieving order of the petitioner. The mother of the petitioner also made a representation on 21.6.2002 to the Chief Minister of Uttaranchal. On the representation of the mother of the petitioner, the Additional Secretary, Govt, of Uttaranchal has directed to stay the relieving order till December 2002, and in compliance of that order petitioner was allowed to continue in the office at Roorkee, District Haridwar. The petitioner has submitted that her mother is widow and infirm and fully dependant upon the petitioner. The Petitioner is the permanent resident of Uttaranchal and she also opted for Uttaranchal. The petitioner has also contended that final allocation of the cadre has not been made by the Central Government in the said department and therefore, respondents are not competent to pass an order relieving the petitioner for State of Uttar Pradesh. This court on 30.1.2003, has passed the following order: “In case the petitioner ws a member of Hill sub Cadre prior to creation of State of Uttaranchal and had opted to Uttaranchal before 9.11.2000, the operation of impugned order dated 13.1.2003 shall remain stayed and the petitioner shall not be interfered from the working as Mukhya Sevika, Department of Women Empowerment & Child Development, Hardwar.” The respondents have not disputed that the petitioner is permanent resident of Uttaranchal. It has also not been disputed that prior to creation of the State of Uttaranchal the petitioner was member of Hill sub cadre, Thus the order dated 13.1.2003 passed by respondent no. 4 deserves to be set aside. So far as payment of salary from 13.6.2002 to 18.9.2002 is concerned, the competent authority is directed to pay salary to the petitioner. In view of above, a writ of certiorari is issued quashing the order-dated 13.1.2003 passed by the respondent no. 4. The respondents are directed to pay salary for the period from 13.6.2002 to 18.9.2002 within a period of six weeks after the receipt of the certified copy of this order. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Dated: 27.3.2006 Rajesh Tandon, J. *Dhyani