IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 613 of 2010 Devi Prasad Kandwal, S/O Late Prasad Kandwal. … Petitioner. Vs. Secretary, Education, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun and others. …Respondents. Mr. Ashok Bisht, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondents. Date August 02, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to fix the seniority of the petitioner and thereby provide him promotion on the post of Head Master, High School from the departmental quota. The petitioner claims to have been initially appointed as C.T. grade teacher on 7-2-1974 and he took over charge on 4-3-1974. The petitioner was promoted to L.T. grade on 28-11-1981. The petitioner also claims to have been promoted to the post of Lecturer (History) and he took over charge on 15-4-2006. The petitioner was given ad hoc promotion in L.T. grade on 28-11-1981 and he was regularised on the said post on 19-4-1991 along with other 136 incumbents. In the seniority list of the year 1980 to 1985, the petitioner was placed at serial no. 171, but in the revised seniority list issued on 6-9-2006 pertaining to year 1980 to 1985, the name of the petitioner was left out. The grievance of the petitioner is that one Om Prakash Mandola, who was junior to the petitioner in the seniority list, was promoted to the post of Head Master without considering the candidature of the petitioner. 2 In the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the ends of justice would be subserved if the respondent no. 2-Director, School Education Uttarakhand is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner for fixing the seniority and giving promotion on the post of Head Master (Annexure-4 to the writ petition). A perusal of the record shows that after making representation dated 4-1-2007, the petitioner sent a number of reminders to the Director of School Education, Uttarakhand, but no response was received by the petitioner. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent no. 2-Director School Education is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure-4 to the petition), which was followed by a number of reminders, expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP