HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 319 of 2004 (SS) Shiv Dutt Milkania ……. Petitioner Versus Transport Commissioner, Uttaranchal & anothers …….Respondents Sri S.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner Standing Counsel for the respondents. Dated: 06.04.2004 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. By the present writ petition the petitioners have prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to regularise the service of the petitioner on the post of Stenographer. Briefly stated the facts given rise to this writ petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Junior Clerk on 0.3.03.1982 and thereafter promoted as Senior Clerk on 20.8.1997. The petitioner has submitted that he has been working as Stenographer from time to time in between 1979 to 1981. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite of his several representations, he has not been regularized on the post of Stenographer. According to him he made last representation on 01.01.2004, which is still pending with the respondents. He has also stated that the Regional Transport officer has strongly recommended through letter dated 8.1.2004 to the Transport Commissioner, Dehradun for regularisation of the petitioner on the post of Stenographer. Abstract of the letter dated 08.01.2004 reads as under: blh rkjrE; esa lwpuh; gS fd foHkkx ds mPpkf/kdkfj;ksa ds izcy laLrqfr i= tks fd Jh esydfu;k dks muds dk;Z in ds vuq:Ik in ,oa osrueku fn;s tku lEcU/kh i=ksa dks blh laKku esa j[kuk U;k;laxr gksxkA foHkkx ds iwoZorhZ leHkkxh; ifjogu vf/kdkfj;ksa ds vfrfjDr mi ifjogu vk;qDr ¼ifj{ks=½@ vij ifjogu vk;qDr }kjk Hkh mDrk'k; ds i= ifjogu vk;qDr dks le;&le; ij izsf"kr fd;s x;s gSaA Jh esydfu;k }kjk jk"Vªfgr esa fd;s tk jgs lkoZtfud dk;ksZa ds iq"V izek.k lfgr lEiw.kZ fooj.k bl dk;kZy; ds i= la[;k 57@iz'k0@fofo/k@ 03 fn0 21-4-2003 ds }kjk iwoZ esa vkids laKku gsrqw izsf"kr fd;k tk pqdk gSA Considering the facts and circumstances mentioned above the respondent no.1 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in the light of the recommendation made by respondent no.2 vide letter dated 8.1.2002 within one month after the receipt of the certified copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. 06.04.2004 Sd/- Dhyani