IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 188 of 2006 (S/B) Kiran Chand S/o Sri Nanak Chand, R/o Village Pali, P.S. Araura, District Haridwar. ……... Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal, through Secretary, Revenue Department, Dehradun. 2. State Public Service Tribunal, Indira Bhawan, Lucknow. 3. Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut (Now Pauri Garhwal). 4. The Collector, Haridwar. ………. Respondents Mr. Anuj Kumar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.B. Tewari, Chief Standing Counsel for respondents Nos. 1, 3 & 4. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. RAJEEV GUPTA, C. J. (Oral) Mr. Anuj Kumar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.B. Tewari, Chief Standing Counsel for respondents Nos. 1, 3 & 4. 2. Mr. N.B. Tewari, the learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents Nos. 1, 3 & 4 has raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the impugned judgment, challenged by petitioner Kiran Chand in this writ petition, has not been passed by a Tribunal situated within the territorial jurisdiction of High Court of Uttarakhand and as such, the High Court of Uttarakhand has no jurisdiction to hear the writ petition challenging the impugned judgment passed by Uttar Pradesh Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow. 3. Mr. Anuj Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not demonstrate as to how High Court of Uttarakhand has jurisdiction to hear the writ petition challenging the judgment passed by Uttar Pradesh Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow. 4. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned judgment passed by Uttar Pradesh Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow before an appropriate forum. 5. With the above order, CLMA No. 12509 of 2005 also stands dismissed. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) (Rajeev Gupta, C.J.) 21.03.2007 21.03.2007 G