IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 354 of 2006 (S/B) Dr. R.K. Srivastava & another. .……… Petitioners Versus The Secretary, Department of Science & Technology & others. .………. Respondents Mr. Gopal Narain, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1. Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for respondents Nos. 2 & 3. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. KHEHAR, C. J. (Oral) The claim of petitioner No. 1 in the instant writ petition is for promotion from the post of Assistant Astronomer to the post of Astronomer. The vacancy, towards which the instant relief is directed, arose on 01.08.1994. Respondent No. 3 was appointed as an Astronomer by direct recruitment as against the aforesaid vacancy on 14.07.1998. 2. It is not a matter of dispute, that petitioner No. 1 has retired on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 30.06.2001. 3. Learned senior counsel for respondent No. 2, having obtained instructions from Dr. Ram Sagar, Director, State Observatory (now Aries), Nainital, states, that to resolve the controversy between the parties, respondent No. 2 is agreeable to allow notional promotion to petitioner No. 1 against the post of Astronomer w.e.f. 14.07.1998, i.e. the date when respondent No. 3 was appointed against the said post, till the date of his superannuation, i.e. 30.06.2001. It is also stated, that petitioner No. 1 would also be entitled to notional fixation of his pay, but no monetary benefits for the period from 14.07.1998 to 30.06.2001. It is, however, conceded, that on the basis of the aforesaid notional pay, the retiral benefits of petitioner No. 1 will be revised on the basis of the notional pay drawn by petitioner No. 1 at the time of his retirement, and further that, all monetary benefits flowing to him on the basis of the said revised fixation of pension, 2 would be released to him as if he had retired on 30.06.2001 from the post of Astronomer. 4. The offer made by respondent No. 2, as has been noticed in the foregoing paragraph, has been accepted by petitioner No. 1. In fact, Mr. Gopal Narain, Advocate representing petitioner No. 1, has sought the express approval of petitioner No. 1-Dr. R.K. Srivastava, who is present in Court in person. 5. In view of the above, the instant writ petition, insofar as petitioner No. 1 is concerned, is disposed of with a direction, that petitioner No. 1-Dr. R.K. Srivastava shall be notionally promoted to the post of Astronomer w.e.f. 14.07.1998. He shall be entitled to notional fixation of pay in the pay scale of the post of Astronomer till the date of his superannuation, i.e. till 30.06.2001. Based thereon, the revised pension of petitioner No. 1 shall be calculated and released to him within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. The instant writ petition, insofar as petitioner No. 1 is concerned, stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 7. Insofar as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner states, that he would be satisfied if he is allowed to withdraw the instant writ petition filed on behalf of petitioner No. 2, so as to enable him to make a representation to respondent No. 1, on the same issues as he has raised in the instant writ petition, with a further direction that respondent No. 1 shall take a final decision thereon within a reasonable time. 8. The proposal made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, in respect of petitioner No. 2, is not opposed by the learned counsel representing respondent No. 1. 9. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the claim raised on behalf of petitioner No. 2, the writ petition filed on behalf of petitioner No. 2 is hereby dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty is given to petitioner No. 2 to move an appropriate representation to respondent No. 1 seeking all the 3 claims as he has raised through the instant writ petition. Needful shall be done positively within two months from today. The aforesaid representation shall be submitted by petitioner No. 2 to the authorities along with a certified copy of this order. On the receipt of the aforesaid representation, the claim of petitioner No. 2 shall be considered and adjudicated upon by respondent No. 1, by passing a well reasoned speaking order, within two months. 10. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 11. Order dasti on payment of usual charges. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C. J.) 23.02.2010 23.02.2010 G