HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition No. 3291(S/S)2001 Kundan Singh Mehra S/o Sri Bahadur Singh Mehra, Resident of village- Dudila, Tehsil- Didihat, District Pithoragarh. ---- Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through its Revenue Secretary, Dehradun, 2. It Inspector General of Stamps, U.P. Allahabad, 3. District Registrar, Almora. ----Respondents. Sri Rajendra Dobhal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Learned Standing counsel for the State/respondent no. 1. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri Rajendra Dobhal, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State/ respondents. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- (a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and quash the order no. 17/95 dated 31.10.1995 passed by the respondent no. 3 (annexure no. --to the writ petition), (b) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Peon under the respondent no. 3 with full back wages and continuity of service, (c) Issue any other writ, direction, or order which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case, (d) To award cost of the writ petition to the petitioner. 2 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, as narrated in the writ petition, is that the petitioner was appointed as Peon in the office of Respondent no. 2 time to time on leave vacancy since 1992 to 1995. Again in the year 1997, the petitioner was appointed for two months in Tehsil-Almora. Though, there is no document alongwith the writ petition which could show that the petitioner has worked as Peon after 1997. However, in the representation which he has made on 25.01.2000 to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Almora he has stated that he had worked during the period since 1992 to 1999 against the leave vacancy and he may be provided appointment on the post of Peon. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents that no post in vacant with the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Department where the petitioner has worked since 1992 and in the absence of any post, the petitioner cannot be provided appointment. 5. In the circumstances narrated above, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. The petition is therefore, liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) July 17, 2006: NCM: