IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1783 (SB) of 2002 Nirmal and others …Petitioners Versus State of Uttaranchal and others …Respondents Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, learned counsel present for the petitioners. Mr. Anil Bisth, learned Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel present for respondent no. 3. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no. 3. Urgency application (IA No. 3837/2011) stands allowed. The matter is being heard with the consent of the parties. The petitioners were issued appointment letter for the post of “Safai Karmchari” in “Nagar Palika Parishad” in the year 1999. However, they were never given the appointment. In the counter affidavit filed by the State as well as “Nagar Palika Parishad” the veracity of such appointment letters has been denied. Consequently, an inquiry was conducted by the order of the High Court on 15.12.2008. In the inquiry report, it has come with the findings that the appointment letters on which the petitioners’ base their claim are genuine and are not forged and fabricated and the same were issued by the Executive Officer, “Nagar Palika Parishad” Haldwani, Nainital. It is further admitted by the respondents that consequent to the said appointment letter the petitioners were never given the appointment in the year 1999 and till date they have not been given such appointments. However, the petitioners have not been able to establish 2 as to whether such appointment letters were issued after due process or not. There is nothing on record to show as to whether “Nagar Palika Parishad” had advertised the vacancies, which were duly published and widely circulated in the newspaper, etc., as it should have been the case. The Court is also conscious of the fact that now it has been almost ten years since the pendency of the writ petition, the counsel for the petitioners relied upon a letter dated 03.02.2011, which is of the Chairman of the “Nagar Palika Parishad”, Haldwani written to the District Government Counsel. The counsel representing the “Nagar Palika Parishad” admits that such appointment letters were issued by the Chairman of the “Nagar Palika Parishad” and therefore, they were asked to show if there were vacancies in the department. This Court has been informed that there is an Administrator in the “Nagar Palika Parishad”, which has been upgraded to “Nagar Nigam” and the same is under the administration of an Administrator. This writ petition is therefore disposed of with a direction to the Administrtator to dispose of the representation of the petitioners and in case there are vacancies of “Safai Karmchari” in the “Nagar Palika Parishad”, the petitioners shall be considered for appointment on these vacancies keeping in view of the letter dated 03.02.2011 as well as 02.04.2011 issued by the Executive Officer of “Nagar Palika Parishad”. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) Dated: 17.10.2011 VKG