IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 790 of 2005 Murlidhar Upadhyaya ….Petitioner. Versus Joint Cane Commissioner, Uttaranchal, Kashipur District Udham Singh Nagar and others …Respondents. Present : Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) In this case stop order was already passed on 15.9.2005 whereby as a last opportunity three weeks’ time was given to the State counsel to file counter affidavit. However, counter affidavit has not been file as yet even after so many years. Therefore, the matter is being heard finally. Heard Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Senior advocate assisted by Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner is a Cane Supervisor working as such since 24.10.1987. Earlier he was working as a “Ganna Gram Sewak”, the nomenclature of which was changed in the year 1988 as Cane Supervisor. The petitioner was transferred from Padrauna (now District Kushi Nagar in Uttar Pradesh) to district Udham Singh Nager and since then he has been working as such. The petitioner claims a higher pay-scale which is being given to a person who has completed 14 years of continuous satisfactory service on the said post. As already stated above, inspite of repeated opportunities counter affidavit has not been filed. Therefore, on the unrebutted averments made by the petitioner, this writ petition is being disposed of with the direction to respondent no. 1 i.e. the Joint Cane Commissioner, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar to decide the representation of the petitioner and in case such pay-scale as has been prayed by 2 the petitioner is applicable to him under the law, the same shall be granted to him. In any case the respondent shall take a decision in the matter by a speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 2.9.2011 Avneet