IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NANITAL Writ Petition No. 1261 (SS) of 2008 Jai Krishna Bahuguna and others …Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. G.D. Joshi, learned counsel present for the petitioners. Mr. N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel present for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. G.D. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioners were candidates of Special B.T.C. Training Course for which counselling was to be held at Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal on 17.06.2008 for general category candidates and on 18.06.2008 for the reserved category candidates. The date of counselling has been published in the daily newspaper “Amar Ujala” on 06.06.2008 and in “Dainik Jagran” on 07.06.2008. According to the petitioners though no specific information was given to them. As the information was received by the petitioners by newspapers and they reached at Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal but they were refused to be given the counselling. Consequently, the petitioners had sought direction from this Court in an earlier writ petition praying for a mandamus to hold fresh counselling for the petitioners for Special B.T.C. Training Course being writ petition no. 821 of 2008 (SS). By order dated 11.08.2008 the learned Single Judge directed the Additional Director, S.C.E.R.T., Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal to decide the representation by speaking and a reasoned order pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.06.2008. Contention of the petitioners that they reached Narendra Nagar on 17.06.2008 is incorrect because the 2 counselling had continued late till night. Had the petitioners reached Narendra Nagar they would have been attended the counselling. The contention that the petitioners reached at Narendra Nagar is therefore incorrect as per the respondents. There is no reason to disbelieve the contention of the respondents as there is no proof given by the petitioners that they had actually reached on the place of counselling on 17.06.2008. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) Dated: 12.10.2011 VKG