HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.344 of 2002 (S/B) Bhagwati Prasad Kothiyal …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others ...Respondents Dated : November 18, 2010 Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. (Oral) Mr. Pankaj Chaturvedi learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bindesh Kumar Gupta, Additional Advocate General for the State. 2. On 30th November, 1988 petitioner retired as Regional Unani Doctor in the employ of the State Government. He, having been promoted on adhoc basis to the post of Regional Unani Doctor by the order dated 03.05.1986 and having not been confirmed as a regular Regional Unani Doctor before his retirement, retired as an adhoc Regional Unani Doctor. In 1993 the State came up with a policy for giving the next higher scale to Regional Unani Doctors who worked as such in the regular posts held by them for a period of eight years on or before 1st January, 1986 provided 2 they come within 20% of senior most amongst them. In 1999 petitioner approached the tribunal seeking grant of the next higher pay scale with effect from 1st January, 1986 until the date he retired. The tribunal rejected the said contention principally on the ground that the petitioner was not a Regional Ayuervedic and Unani Officer but he was an adhoc Regional Ayuervedic and Unani Officer and accordingly was not covered by the decision dated 13th May, 1993. The petitioner is accordingly before us in the present writ petition. 3. Assuming there is no difference between an adhoc and a regular employee, but in order to come within the four corners of the decision of the Government dated 13th May, 1993, which is effective from 1st January, 1986, the petitioner was required to have worked as such doctor for a period of eight years atleast. Petitioner did not get an opportunity to serve, as such doctor for eight years, inasmuch as, he was appointed on promotion as such adhoc doctor only on 3rd May, 1986 and retired on 30th November, 1988. The writ petition fails and same is accordingly dismissed. (V.K.Bist, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 18.11.2010 Arti 3