IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 77 OF 2008 (S/S) Narendra Singh and another. ………..……Petitioners. Versus State of U.P. & others. ………….Respondents. Mr. Manoj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 3 and 4. Mr. S.P.S. Panwar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1 and 2. 29th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Heard Mr. Manoj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 3 and 4 and Mr. S.P.S. Panwar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel (U.P.) for the respondent no. 1 and 2. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order-dated 11.1.1990 passed by the respondent no. 2 and orders dated 28.1.1991 passed by the respondent no. 4, whereby the petitioners have been reverted from the post of Senior Clerk to the post of Junior Clerk in the Irrigation Construction Division. 3. The petitioners were appointed on the post of Routine Grade Clerk now known as Junior Clerk in the Irrigation Department of State of U.P. vide order dated 8.2.1979 and 9.2.1979. A tentative seniority list was 2 published on 20.5.1986 on the post of Junior Clerk in the Irrigation Department of State of U.P. and in the said Seniority List the name of the petitioner no. 1 & 2 finds place at Serial No. 1233 and 1239 respectively. Thereafter, opposite party no. 1 passed an order to the effect that if any employee working on the post of Junior Clerk in the Department wants to file any objection against the tentative seniority list dated 20.5.1986 may file the same within one week. The respondent no. 4 passed an order dated 1.7.1987 promoting the petitioners on the post of Senior Clerk w.e.f. 1.9.1983. Vide order No. Aa-Aa-1- 1763/10-39(M) 89 dt. 3.6.89 and order No. 8-A-1032/89- 23 S-8/47 A-39 dated 10.8.1989 passed by the opposite party no. 1, the pay scale of cadre of Senior Clekr in the Irrigation Department was revised and the new pay scale for the said cadre is Rs. 1200-2040. On 24.12.1988, the opposite party no. 2 issued a State Level tentative seniority list of the persons, who are working on the pst of Senior Clerk in the Department. Opposite Party No. 4 on 28.1.1991 issued an order reverting the petitioner no. 1 from the post of Senior Clerk to the post of Junior Clerk w.e.f. 24.12.1988. Aggrieved with the said order, the petitioners filed this writ petition in the Allahabad High Court and the Allahabad High Court vide order dated 13.3.1991 stayed the operation of the revision order of the petitioners until further orders. In pursuance of the stay order dated 08.02.1991, the petitioners are working on the post of Senior Clerk and they are still continuing on their respective posts. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the facts of present writ petition are 3 squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 21st October, 2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 13-A(S/S) of 2003 Smt. Rashmi Verma and another Vs. State of U.P. and others. where this Hon’ble Court has observed as under: “It has further been contended that the petitioners are working on the post of Senior Clerk for about 20 years and, in fact, they have already been granted the revised pay-scale to the post of Senior Clerk which was revised in the year 1986 and again in the year 1996. It has been contended that the order of reversion was passed by the respondents without affording them any opportunity of hearing. It is not disputed in the counter affidavit that any opportunity of hearing was afforded prior to passing of the impugned orders whereas; the petitioners have been permitted to continue on the posts of Senior Clerks. The petitioners have worked on the post of Senior Clerk for a long period, therefore, the petitioners should not have been reverted back without giving them opportunity of hearing. I find force in the submission of the leaned counsel for the petitioners. For the reasons recorded above, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 28.01.1991 passed by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Construction Division, Pithoragrah contained as annexure nos. 8&9 to the writ petition, are quashed. No order as to costs.” 5. I am fully convinced with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and present writ petition is decided in terms of the order dated 21st October, 2005 in Writ Petition NO. WPSS No. 13-A of 4 2003 Rashmi Verma and another Vs. State of U.P. and others. 6. Consequently, impugned orders dated 11.1.1990 passed by the respondent no. 2/ Executive-in- Chief, Irrigation Department, Uttar Pradesh and order of reversion dated 28.1.1991 passed by the respondent no. 4 / Executive Engineer, Irrigation Construction Division, District Pithoragarh (Annexure No. 7,8 and 9 to the writ petition) are quashed. No order as to costs. (P.C.Verma, J.) 29.7.2008 Rathour