IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 712 of 2009 Sri Pratap Singh Gosain ...Petitioner. Versus Chief Executive Officer and others …Respondents. Present : Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. B. S. Negi, Advocate for respondent no.3. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. B. S. Negi, Advocate for respondent no.3. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Clerk/Typist in co- operative society namely, Herbal Development Co-operative Society, Uttarkashi. The petitioner contends that he has now undergone training in Institute of Cooperative Management, Dehradun and hence he is liable to be promoted for the post of Secretary of the cooperative society. There are certain recommendations also in favour of the petitioner and hence he made following prayers: “(i) To issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing to the Respondent No.2 to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Chief Executive Officer District Herbal Development Co-operative Society, Uttarkashi as recommended by the Chairman in his letter dated 18.11.2008. (ii) Pass any other/further suitable order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iii) Award the cost of writ petition to the petitioner.” 3. The writ petition is contested by the State Authorities in which they have stated that the prayer of the petitioner cannot be granted primarily in view of the fact that the Secretary is always appointed by the State Government. Moreover, if at all the recommendation has to be from Board of the Cooperative 2 Society. Presently, there is being no recommendation in favour of the petitioner by the Board for such promotion. The petitioner has not been able to show any law in his favour, which shows that merely on the said recommendations, promotion can be made. The writ petition has no merit and is liable to be dismissed and is presently being dismissed. 4. However, there is always a liberty open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy either before the State Government or before the Board for such promotion as, he presently seeking. 5. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 3.11.2011 Kuldeep