IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 62 of 2006 (S/B) Dr. Rajendra Kumar, S/o Late Sri Baldev Prasad Verma, Presently posted as Veterinary Officer, Veterinary Hospital, New Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal. ……. Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India, through Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training, Govt. of India, Lok Nayak Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Khan Market, New Delhi – 110003. 2. State of Uttaranchal, through Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry, Govt. of Uttaranchal, Dehrdun. 3. Principal Secretary, State Recorganization Department, Dehradun Uttaranchal. 4. Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India, Lok Nayak Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Khan Market, New Delhi – 110 003. 5. Chairman, State Advisory Committee, Gate No. 31, Jawahar Lal Nehru Stadium, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 6. Director (SR) Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India, 3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi. 7. Principal Secretary, U.P. Reorganization Co-ordination Department / Member Secretary, State Advisory Committee, Section – 1, U.P. Secretariat, Vikas Bhawan, Lucknow. 8. Dr. Neeraj Singhal, Uttaranchal Livestock Development Officer, 233 Basant Vihar, Dehradun. 9. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Veterinary Officer. Uttarkashi. 10. Dr. Prem Kumar, Veterinary Officer, Bhagwanpur, Haridwar, Distt. Haridwar. 2 11. Dr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Veterinary Officer, Manglore, Haridwar. District Udham Singh Nagar. 12. Dr. Ashish Rawat, Veterinary Officer, Mobile Veterinary Hospital, Dispensary Road, Dehradun. 13. Dr. R.S. Negi, Uttaranchal Livestock Development Officer, 233 Basant Vihar, Dehradn. 14. Dr. Jitendra Gupta, Veterinary Officer, C/o Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Pauri Garhwal. 15. Dr. Harish Chandra Joshi, Veterinary Officer, Veterinary Hospital, Champawat. 16. Dr. Ramesh Singh Natwal, Veterinary Officer, Veterinary Hospital, Pithoragarh. 17. Dr. Bhupendra Singh Jangpangi, Veterinary Officer, Veternary Hospital, Nainital. 18. Dr. Satya Swaroop, Veterinary Officer, Veterinary Hospital, Doiwala, Dehradun. ……… Respondents Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, Addl. Standing Counsel (Central Govt.). Mr. J.P. Joshi, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttaranchal. Ms. Beena Pandey, Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon. Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Hon’ble P.C. Pant, J. RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. (Oral) Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, Addl. Standing Counsel (Central Govt.) for respondents Nos. 1, 4, 5 and 6. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for respondents Nos. 2 and 3. Ms. Beena Pandey, Standing Counsel (U.P. Govt.) for respondent No. 7. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs: 3 “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Order dated 22.09.2005 passed by Respondent No. 4 annexed as Annexure No. 1. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to Respondents to finally allocate the Petitioner to State of Uttaranchal with all consequential benefits. III. Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. IV. Award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.” 3. Though Final Allocation List (Annexure 1) was published on 22.9.2005, the petitioner appears to have submitted a representation only on 10.02.2006. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner did not submit any representation after the circulation of Tentative Final Allocation List. The petitioner has tried to explain his above conduct by saying that the Tentative Final Allocation List was, in fact, never circulated. 4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the petitioner did not submit any representation after the circulation of the Tentative Final Allocation List in the year 2003 and not even after the publication of the Final Allocation List (Annexure 1) on 22.09.2005 for a period of more than four months. As such, the respondents cannot be blamed for not considering the petitioner’s case on the basis of his representation as the representation filed along with the writ petition was submitted only on 10.02.2006. 5. However, we deem it proper to direct third respondent Union of India through its Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training to consider and pass an appropriate order on petitioner’s representation (Annexure 12) within a period of six weeks from today in accordance with law. 4 6. We leave it open to the Department to relieve the petitioner immediately for his joining in the State of U.P. or to defer his relieving till his representation is finally decided. 7. With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. (P.C. Pant, J.) (Rajeev Gupta, C.J.) 25.02.2006 25.02.2006 G