1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 415 of 2006 (S/S) Jagjeewan Singh Bisht S/o Harsh Singh Bisht R/o S.D. S.G. Inter College Pithoragarh. ..……...Petitioner Versus 1. Director General Directed of N.C.C. (U.P. & U.A.) Ashok Nagar, Lucknow. 2. N.C.C. Group Head Quarter Nainital. 3. Commanding Officer 80 U.A. Bn. N.C.C., Pithoragarh 4. Principal, S.D.S.G. Inter College Pithoragarh. 5. Laxman Singh Khati Lecturer, S.D.S.G.I.C., Pithoragarh ………….Respondents. Shri J.C. Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri K.N. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent No. 5. Shri Pradeep Joshi, learned counsel for respondents No. 1, 2 and 3. Shri N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 4. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.09.2005 (Annexure-4), order dated 19.10.2005 (Annexure-7) and order dated 06.03.2006 (Annexure- 12), passed by respondent No. 3. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Assistant Teacher in S.D.S. Government Inter College. A senior division wing of N.C.C. was opened in said college and petitioner was given work of care taker of Associated N.C.C. Officer, vide letter dated 31.07.1998. It appears that he continued thereafter and from time-to-time renewals were made in this regard in 2 his favour. The impugned order dated 28.09.2005, shows that in view of petitioner, completing age of 42 years, a letter was sent by Commanding Officer of N.C.C. to the Principal of College to make fresh recommendation for the Associated N.C.C. Officer from amongst two Lecturers, who are teaching the intermediate classes. The Principal in reply to said letter, appears to have invited application from the teachers in the college, a copy of which is Annexure-5 to the petition. Meanwhile, it appears that Principal had already recommended the name of the petitioner for being assigned work as care taker of Associated N.C.C. Officer. However, the Commanding Officer did not accept the recommendation, as is clear from his letter dated 19.10.2005 (Annexure-7 to writ petition). Thereafter, vide letter dated 21.10.2005, another recommendation was sent by the Principal to the Commanding Officer in favour of the petitioner. But Commanding Officer, vide letter dated 29.01.2006, appointed respondent No. 5- Lt. L.S. Khati, who had joined as Lecturer in S.D.S. G.I.C., Pithoragarh on transfer from G.I.C., Dewalthal. It is this letter, which has given cause to the petitioner to file this writ petition. Letter dated 30.01.2006 (Copy Annexure-9 to the writ petition), shows that various Lecturers were invited for interview before the selection board. But the petitioner was not invited in said interview. The petitioner made a representation but to no avail. A final order dated 06.03.2006 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) was passed by the Colonel/Commanding Officer, N.C.C., asking the Principal to take charge 3 from the petitioner of Associated N.C.C. Officer and handover to Lt. Khati (respondent No. 5). 4. The writ petition was contested by the respondents and the counter affidavits were filed. In the joint counter affidavit of respondent No. 1, 2 and 3, it is stated that the petitioner is not taking classes of 11th and 12th in the College, as such, he could not have been appointed as Associated N.C.C. Officer, particularly in view of the fact that meanwhile qualified person Lt. L.S. Khati, a Lecturer in the Government Inter College had joined in the college. It is further stated in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 that as a right, the petitioner cannot claim the charge of Associated N.C.C. Officer. Respondent No. 5 – Shri Laxman Singh Khati, has filed his separate counter affidavit, claiming that he was rightly appointed as Associated N.C.C. Officer, as he had already got experience and training in the previous college i.e. Government Inter College, Dewalthal. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing papers on record, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner being not Lecturer to teach the intermediate classes particularly when other qualified Lecturers were available for the post of Associated N.C.C. Officer, as such, he (petitioner) cannot claim to remain care taker of Associated N.C.C., Officer even after the Commanding Officer, has appointed respondent No. 5 to the post. 4 6. Since there is no violation of any right of the petitioner, as such, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order, whereby the petitioner has been asked to handover charge of Associated N.C.C. Officer to the respondent No. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Dt. 07.12.2006 (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) S