IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. (SS) 950 of 2010 Smt. Bhumo Devi Joshi …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ….Respondents Present : Mr. Karan Anand, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, Brief Holder Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. Karan Anand, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. Petitioner was working as “Angan Bari Worker”. She resigned in the year 2000. Now she has filed a writ petition claiming the benefit of Government Order which came into force in the year 1998 by which an “Angan Bari Worker” who had worked for 10 years in continuous service, she could have been considered for the post of “Angan Bari Supervisor”. Since this has not been done in the case of the petitioner, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court with the following prayers:- “(1) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Mukhya Sevika Bal Vikas (Aganbadi Supervisor) in the department of Bal Vikas Ewam Pushtahar from the post of Aagan Bari Worker considering her eligibility for the said post. (ii) Any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this Court. (iii) Award the cost of petition to the petitioner. Admittedly the petitioner resigned with effect from 25.1.2000. She has filed a writ petition in the year 2010 claiming the above relief. The petitioner had earlier filed a 2 writ petition being Writ Petition No. 38126 of 1998 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, which was disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to move a representation before the concerned authority. The petitioner contends that she had moved several representations, but in vain. The last representation of the petitioner is of 16.1.2006. Petitioner has approached this Court belatedly i.e. after more than 4 years. Learned State counsel Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht has stated that such a benefit of Government Order dated 16.7.1998 which has been relied upon by the petitioner, could not be granted to her, as she admittedly has not completed 10 years of continuous service. On the above set of facts, even if this Court ignores the inordinate delay in filing of this writ petition this Court finds little in the merit of the case as well since the petitioner was not in continuous service of 10 years as “Angan Bari Worker” at the time Government Order dated 16.7.1998 came into force. The writ petition is therefore liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 20.9.2011 Kuldeep