IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 700 of 2004 Ashutosh Rawat …….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and another. ….Respondents. Present : Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no.1. Mr. Pankaj Purohit, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Date of Decision :- 13.8.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsels for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, inter alia, challenging the order dated 16.6.2004 (Annexure -11 to the writ petition) passed by the Additional Secretary, State of Uttarakhand, Dehradun, whereby the claim of the petitioner for appointment as Junior Engineer in “Zila Panchayat”, Chamoli has been rejected. The reason given for rejecting the claim of the petitioner by the Additional Secretary is that the post of Junior Engineer in “Zila Panchayats” is a centralised post, therefore, selections for the said post have to be made in accordance with law and the appointment as sought by the petitioner on contract basis cannot be made. 3. Mr. Pankaj Purohit, Advocate for the “Zila Panchayat”, Chamoli reiterates the stand taken in the counter affidavit and states that the post of Junior Engineer is a centralised post and appointments can be made on the post only after a due selection is made by the Public Service Commission. 2 4. As such, the claim of the petitioner for appointment as a Junior Engineer on contract basis is totally misconceived. The prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be granted and this Court finds no fault in the impugned order dated 16.6.2004 (Annexure – 11 to the writ petition). 5. The writ petition has, therefore, no merit and is liable to be dismissed and the same is dismissed as such. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 13.8.2010 Rathour