IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 180 (SS) of 2011 Dharamveer Singh and another …Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and another …Respondents Mr. K.S. Bora, learned counsel present for the petitioner Mr. Anil Bisht, learned brief Holder present for the State of Uttarkhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. K.S. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Bisht, learned brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner was appointed as Ganna Gram Sewak. Subsequently he was promoted to the Senior Cane Development Inspector. The case of the petitioner is that he is liable to be confirmed on the post of Cane Development Inspector. He contends that the post of Cane Development Inspector though was initially within the purview of the State Public Service Commission but in the year 2002, a decision was taken by the State Government to remove certain posts from the purview of the State Public Service Commission and the post of Cane Development Inspector is one of them. The case of petitioner has not been considered despite of which he is working on the post of Senior Cane Development Inspector so many years. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State wherein the respondents have replied and admitted that as to the post of Cane Development Inspector is outside the purview of the State Public Service Commission vide government order dated 19th October 2002 whereby such decision was taken but they have admitted practical difficulty in making such promotion inasmuch as though a draft rules namely, Uttaranchal (now Uttarakhand) 2 Subordinate Cane Service Grade I & II (General) Service Rules, 2006 have been framed and forwarded. The said rules have not been made into the rules at present and are in the form of a draft rules. This Court refrains from making any direction to the respondents from framing rules, as that is purely a legislative function. All the same, the respondents have themselves admitted that in the State, there is an acute shortage of Senior Cane Development Inspectors, which is only liable to be filled by way of promotion from the feeding cadre i.e. Cane Development Inspectors. Considering these facts, till such draft rules acquire the shape of rules, the respondents may take a decision of making provisional/officiating promotion to the post of Senior Cane Development Inspector, which shall be subject to the rules framed by the State Government. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) Dated: 16.09.2011 VKG