IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 894/2010(S/S) Guna Nand Juyal S/o Sri D. Juyal ……Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and 2 others… Respondents Mr. I.D. Paliwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Shah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. (Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.) Heard Mr. I.D. Paliwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Shah, Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the relief in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned transfer order dated 3-8-2010 issued by the respondent no.2, to the extent of the petitioner only (annexure no.1 to the writ petition). Further prayer is also made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents not to give an effect to the transfer order dated 3-8-2010, issued by respondent no.2 to the extent of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner, raised in the present writ petition, is that he has been wrongly transferred from District Tehri to District Pauri. The transfer policy is to transfer those persons who have completed 15 years service in a District. The service of the petitioner in Tehri District is only eleven years, and when the representation was made to the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Tehri Garhwal to this effect, he also referred the case of the petitioner to the Director Panchayati Raj, Uttarakhand, Dehradun vide letter dated 27-8-2010 (annexure-5 to the writ petition) that 2 the date of joining of the petitioner in Tehri District is 1.7.1999 and by mistake it has been wrongly shown as 19-6-1979. The further contention of the petitioner is that due to above mistake he has been transferred by the authority concerned. In view of above fact, it is directed that the respondent no.2, Director, Panchayati Raj, Uttarakhand, Dehradun shall pass a reasoned and speaking order after considering the recommendation of D.P.R.O. dated 27-8-2010, within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The petitioner would be at liberty to make fresh representation before the respondent no.2, annexing therewith the recommendation of D.P.R.O. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of finally. Dated: 27-09-2010 (B.S. Verma, J.) ISB