IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 311 (SS) OF 2006 Prem Narayan Dixit, S/o Shri Jagdeesh Prasad Dixit, Working as Deputy Account and Revenue Assistant, (Lekha-Avem Rajaswa Up-Sahayak In the Office of Executive Engineer, Maintenance Division, Uttarnachal Jal Sansthan, New Tehri, Tehri Garhwal. ……………Petitioner. Versus 1. The Chief General Manager, Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan, Jal Bhawan, 13 Block, Nehru Colony, Dehradun. 2. Finance Director Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan, Jal Bhawan, 13 Block, Nehru Colony, Dehradun. 3. The Secretary (Administration), Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan, Jal Bhawan, 13 Block, Nehru Colony, Dehradun. 4. The Account Officer, Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan, Jal Bhawan, 13 Block, Nehru Colony, Dehradun. 5. Executive Engineer, Maintenance Division, Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan, New Tehri, Tehri Garhwal. ………………..Respondents. Sri N.S. Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Sri Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for the respondents no. 1 to 5. Dated: 07.03.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the Final Seniority List dated 20.11.2004. The petitioner has further prayed for a writ of 2 Mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to the seniority list dated 20.11.2004. Petitioner has further prayed for a writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents that if any promotion list made by seniority list dated 20.11.2004, such promotion shall be subject to the writ petition. The petitioner has confined his prayer for issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner-dated 25.07.2005 against the Final Seniority List dated 20.11.2004. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that on 01.07.1983, the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Clerk in the office of Executive Engineer Garhwal Jal Sansthan, Tehri Garhwal (i.e. known as Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan). According to the petitioner, till date he is working in the department with the utmost satisfaction of his superior officers and there is not even a single complaint against him and the service record of the petitioner is unblemished. The petitioner has submitted that the Clerks of the Jal Sansthan were divided into two cadre (1)-Account Cadre Clerk, (2) General Cadre Clerk and both types of Clerk were having separate seniority list in the department. The petitioner has submitted that till 10.06.2003, the seniority list of the Clerks of Account Cadre and General Cadre Clerk were having separate seniority list, where the name of the petitioner was shown at Serial No. 21. On 09.07.2003, the respondents issued tentative combined seniority list of Accounts Cadres Clerk and General Cadre Clerk and further asked the employees to file their option if any. Being aggrieved by the tentative combined seniority list dated 09.07.2003, the petitioner on 15.03.2004 made a detailed representation to the respondent no. 1 through proper channel 3 by raising his grievance against the said tentative combined seniority list stating that there should be separate seniority list for the account cadre clerk and general cadre clerk. On 01.11.2004, the petitioner made a representation to respondent no. 1 through proper channel against the combined tentative seniority list. The petitioner has submitted that on 20.11.2004 the respondent no. 2 has illegally issued final combined seniority list of the Account Cadre Clerk and General Cadre Clerk without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, but till date the representations dated 15.03.2004 and 01.11.2004 filed by the petitioner have not been decided by the respondents as yet. On 05.02.2005, the petitioner made a representation against the final combined seniority list and raised his grievance before the concerned authority requesting that there should be a separate seniority list for Accounts Cadre Clerk and the General Cadre Clerk. On 25.07.2005, a detailed representation was also made on behalf of Union i.e. Garhwal Jalsansthan Karmchari Union Dehradun to the respondents requesting them to decide the grievance of the employees, who raised their objection against the combined seniority list. On 26.04.2005, the petitioner sent a legal notice through an Advocate to all the respondents and requested them to fix their seniority as per the date of initial appointment i.e the seniority should be fixed according to separate cadre, but the same has not yet been decided. Therefore, in view of the above, the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25.07.2005 along with the legal notice dated 26.04.2005 and 4 pass an appropriate order within a period of three months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order. Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 07.03.2006 Rathour