IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 106 of 2011 (S/B) Smt. Maya Devi ….…… Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others ………. Respondents Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, Standing Counsel for the Union of India / respondent No. 1. Ms. Bina Pande, Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. / respondent Nos. 2 to 4. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State / respondent Nos. 5 to 8. Date of Judgment: 21.11.2011 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) Miscellaneous Application No. 12008 of 2011 Short counter affidavit is kept with the record. With the application, a short counter affidavit has been filed by the Union of India, which has been wrongly described as additional counter affidavit. Writ Petition No. 106 of 2011 (S/B) On 23rd May, 2011, Union of India was asked to take a decision on the representation made by the petitioner as quickly as possible and to report the same to this Court latest by six weeks by filing an affidavit. The aforementioned short counter affidavit has been filed to comply with the said order of this Court. 2. In paragraph 3 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that on 17th October, 2011, State Advisory Committee considered the representation of the petitioner, when it was decided to allocate the petitioner to the State of Uttarakhand, as was sought by him in his representation. It has been stated that though such a decision has been taken, but the formal recommendation of the Committee has not received so far. It has been stated that the final allocation order of the petitioner, allocating him to the State of Uttarakhand, would be issued with the approval of the competent authority as soon as the recommendation of the Committee is received. 2 3. In the circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition by directing the competent authority to issue final allocation order of the petitioner allocating him to the State of Uttarakhand, accepting the recommendation to be made by the State Advisory Committee, which, though has not formally reached the competent authority, but the decision in that regard is within the knowledge of the competent authority. Accordingly, for all practical purposes, it shall be deemed that the petitioner stands allocated to the State of Uttarakhand. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 21.11.2011 21.11.2011 Amit