IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 189 of 2011 Girish Chandra Durgapal S/o late Sri Anand Ballabh Durgapal, Presently working as State Industrial Training Centre, Haldwani, District Nainital. ..………. Appellant Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary/Deputy Secretary, Employment and Training Department, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun. 2. Director, Employment and Training Directorate, Uttarakhand, Haldwani, District Nainital. 3. Joint Director (Prashikshan/Shishi), State Industrial Training Centre, Haldwani. ……...…. Respondents Present: Mr. S.S. Yadav, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Chief Standing Counsel for the State /respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, Chief Justice Hon’ble V.K. Bist, Judge Date: 20th August, 2011 JUDGMENT Barin Ghosh, C.J. (Oral) In the writ petition, an interim order has not been granted and, accordingly, the present appeal has been preferred. 2. In the writ petition, it has been contended that gross irregularities have been committed while conducting the selection. The learned Judge has called upon the respondents to give a response in that regard. In the event it is held that the irregularities are such that the selection is vitiated, the selection will be declared to be inappropriate. In such circumstances, scope of grant of an interim order is very thin. The other contention is that, in violation of the rules without publishing the result of the selection, steps are 2 being taken to give appointment. Except a letter dated 8th August, 2011, being Annexure-1 to the application for interim order, there is no other evidence to suggest that steps are being taken to give appointment. Annexure-1 to the interim application, as it appears to us, is in furtherance of completion of the selection and not for the purpose of giving appointment. By that, request has been made to give sanction to spend ` 7,500/-to acquire postal stamps in order to inform the candidates to produce their testimonials for the purpose of comparison. The fact remains that the select list has not been published. Unless contrary is shown, the said state of affair clearly demonstrates that no steps are being taken to give appointment. Inasmuch as, contrary has not been shown or attempted to be shown, question of issuing any interim order did never arise. 3. The appeal is thoroughly misconceived and the same is dismissed. (V.K. Bist, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 20.08.2011 20.08.2011 P. Singh