IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 654 of 2011 Shah Ali Khan ….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others …Respondents. Present : Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner was a “Kurk Amin” in co-operative society in the State of Uttarakhand, who was appointed on commission basis. The petitioner retired from service on 28.2.2009 after attaining the age of superannuation. Earlier, the “Uttaranchal Sangarsh Kurk Amin Parishad” had filed a writ petition in its representative capacity being writ petition no. 4796 (SS) of 2001, wherein it had approached this Court for a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to treat the “Kurk Amins” who are members of the said petitioner organization as a member of civil post. The said writ petition was allowed vide order dated 31.3.2006. The State of Uttarakhand had filed a Special Appeal. The Special Appeal was dismissed though with a slight modification in the order of the learned Single Judge dated 31.3.2006, whereby the benefits to these “Kurk Amins” were given only from 9.11.2000 and not from 16.11.1985. It has been stated at the bar that against the said order the State of Uttarakhand filed a Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court which was also dismissed. Now the present petitioner who also claims to be “Kurk Amin”, yet the benefit has not been given to him, thus constrained he has filed the present writ petition for the same relief. 2 Learned counsels for the parties very fairly state that the factual and legal position adjudicated upon by this Court while disposing of Writ Petition (S/S) No. 409 of 2011 (Harish Chandra Nautiyal and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others) are squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present writ petition as well. In view of the statement made by the learned counsels for the parties, since the controversy raised in the present writ petition is squarely the same as raised in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 409 of 2011 (Harish Chandra Nautiyal and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others), this writ petition is being disposed of in terms of the order dated 22.9.2011 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 409 of 2011 (Harish Chandra Nautiyal and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others). No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 28.9.2011 Avneet