IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1404 of 2004 (S/S) Sri Suresh Chand Sharma S/o Sri Ilam Chand Sharma ..……… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ……… Respondents Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Heard Shri I.P. Kohli, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Subhash Upadhaya, the learned Brief Holder for respondent No.1, Shri Pankaj Miglani, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Shri Rakesh Thapliyal, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5. The petitioner presented this writ petition in the year 2004 praying for the quashing of the seniority list and for the issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the authorities to include the name of the petitioner in the seniority list of Meter Readers and to pay the appropriate pay scale of Meter Readers w.e.f. 01/06/1994. This relief itself cannot be granted since much water has flown since 1994 and the State of Uttarakhand was created in the year 2000. The petitioner has apparently approached the Court belatedly and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground itself. However, from a bare perusal of the writ petition, the petitioner contends that he was appointed as a Meter Reader on 12/11/1980 under the provisions of Section 70 of the U.P. Municipalities Act for a period of two months and that his service was extended from time to time and, eventually, his services was regularized by a resolution of the Board dated 30th September, 1989. In paragraph 5 of the writ petition, the petitioner contends that by an order dated 27/05/1994, the petitioner was regularized again in the pay scale of 750-940. This order of regularization 2 was made on the basis of the representation of the petitioner itself and his claim that he should be given pay scale of 800-1150 was declined. This happened on 27th May, 1994 and on this pay scale the petitioner continued to get wages which was eventually revised to a pay scale of Rs. 2550-3200/- w.e.f. 01/01/1996. From 1994 till 2004, the petitioner remained silent and after the creation of the State of Uttarakhand, the petitioner has now filed this writ petition claiming that he should be given the pay scale of Meter Reader with all consequential benefits from the year 1994 onwards. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was regularized as a Meter Reader by a resolution of 30th September, 1989 and, therefore, the second regularization order of 1994 was patently erroneous and cannot be taken into consideration. In my opinion, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is bereft of merit. The resolution of the Board is a general resolution and it does not indicate that the petitioner’s services had been regularized in the year 1989. There is no documentary proof filed by the petitioner to indicate that he was being paid the salary in the pay scale of 825-1200 between the period 1989 to 1994. Consequently, this court does not find anything to indicate that the petitioner was regularized and was paid the salary of a Meter Reader from 1989 to 1994. Consequently, no relief can be granted to the petitioner for the period 1994 onwards. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 25.02.2010 Shiv