IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 160 of 2006 Prakash Chandra Punetha …Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. …Respondents. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for respondent no.2. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. The petitioner claims promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer with effect from 9.10.1998. 2. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 states that the petitioner has been granted promotion against the post of Assistant Engineer vide order dated 9.9.2009. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer with effect from 9.10.1998 will be considered by the respondents and a well reasoned speaking order will be passed within one month from today. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no objection to the disposal of the instant writ petition in terms of the statement made by the learned counsel representing respondent no. 2. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 to pass a well reasoned speaking order considering the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer with effect from 9.10.1998. The aforesaid speaking order be communicated to the petitioner within one month from today. 3. The instant writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 29.4.2010 Rathour