HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1673 of 2006 (S/S) Kheem Singh Bisht … Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and four others. … Respondents Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for the State/respondents. Dated: April 22, 2009: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner on Class-III post either in the Health Department or any other department as per his qualification under Uttarakhand Aandolankari Quota, as has been done in the case of similarly situated persons. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been declared as Uttarakhand Aandolankari and in pursuance of the Govt. Order dated 11.08.2004 the District Magistrate, Champawat wrote a letter (annexure no.3 to the writ petition) to the Chief Medical Officer Champawat on 01.02.2005 regarding the appointment of the petitioner on Class-IV post. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that since the petitioner should have been given appointment on Class- III post in accordance with his educational qualification, but the respondents did not consider his qualification in providing him appointment in Class III post. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the State 2 Govt. had made a policy and under this policy the Govt. has provided appointments to such persons who were the Uttarakhand Aandolankari on Class-III posts. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have offered him appointment on Class-IV post. It is vehemently argued that the petitioner was qualified to be appointed on Class-III post, therefore he should have been appointed in Class-III post whereas he has been offered appointment on Class-IV post. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner passed Intermediate Examination in the year 1999 and similarly situated person, namely, Kamal Rajan was also given benefit of higher qualification for which the District Magistrate, Champawat had made recommendation. Counsel for the petitioner prays that the case of the petitioner may also be considered for appointment on Class-III post. In this regard the petitioner has already made representation on 6th April 2009. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer to the extent that the District Magistrate, Champawat/ respondent no. 5 may be directed to decide his representation dated on 6th April 2009 (contained as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit) within the period prescribed by this Court. Learned Standing Counsel for the State has no objection to this prayer. 6. The prayer is innocuous. 7. In view of the forgoing circumstances the District Magistrate, Champawat/respondent no. 5 is directed to 3 decide the representation of the petitioner (contained as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit) within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 8. With this direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. 9. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) 22.04.2009 NCM: