IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 303 (S/B) of 2007 Lalit Verma S/o Shri K.K. Verma Assistant Engineer (Electrical/ Mechanical) Office of Chief Engineer Grade-I P.W.D., Dehradun. ...........Petitioner Versus Principal Secretary Public Works Department Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow & Others. ..............Respondents Shri V.K. Bisht, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Sangeeta Miyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Anjali Bhargawa, learned standing counsel for Union of India. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents No. 3,6,7 and 9. Smt. Bina Pande, learned Standing Counsel for rest of the respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Oral:- Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- (i) to issue a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 1 and 5 to send another TFAL by considering the claim of the petitioner under hill sub- cadre of PWD on the basis of his option for hill sub-cadre and also in view of direction dated 10.03.2000 issued by the State of Public Service Tribunal case No. 1854/1997. (ii) to issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner before taking final decision for allocation of employees of the Public Works Department to the State of Uttarakhand. (iii) to issue any suitable writ, order or direction of any nature which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. (IV) Award the cost of petition to the petitioner. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds no reason to grant mandamus as sought in relief (i) quoted above. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is confining his prayer only to relief No. (ii) i.e. pertaining to taking of decision on the representation made by him. 4. The writ petition is dismissed for relief No. (i). The writ petition is disposed of for relief No. 2 with the observation that the representation made by the petitioner may be considered by the authorities concerned within a reasonable time. (Dharam Veer, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt: 03.12.2007 Sweta