IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 217 of 2009 (S/B) Tara Dutt Pant & Another ………..…Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others ……Respondents Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Indu Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Standing Counsel with Mr. P.C. Bisht, Brief Holder for the respondents no. 1 & 4. Mr. V.P. Bahuguna, Standing Counsel for Union of India/respondent nos. 3 & 6. Ms. Beena Pande, Standing Counsel for the State of U.P./ respondent nos. 2 & 5. Dated :- October 09, 2009 Corum : Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, ACJ. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (By the Court) Heard Mr. Sharad Sharma, learned Senior Advocate with Ms. Indu Sharma, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. J.P. Joshi, learned Standing Counsel with Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the respondents no. 1 & 4, Mr. V.P. Bahuguna, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India/respondent nos. 3 & 6 and Ms. Beena Pande, Standing Counsel for the State of U.P./ respondent nos. 2 & 5. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 30th September, 2009 passed by the Chief Engineer/respondent no. 4. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that the petitioners’ name was not included, on account of a mistake, in the final allocation list dated 8th August, 2008, and now, an opinion has been sought as to whether the petitioners should be relieved or not and consequently repatriated to the State of Uttar Pradesh. It transpires that the matter is pending consideration before the State Advisory Committee, which is looking into the 2 matter. Consequently, at this stage, there is no reason for this Court to interfere. The writ petition is premature and is dismissed as such. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (Tarun Agarwala, ACJ.) Dated 09.10.2009 Rathour