IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 298 of 2010 (S/B) Dr. Vinita Rawat ….…… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………. Respondents Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Kumar, Standing Counsel for the State / respondents. Date of Judgment: 28.04.2011 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) By an order dated 9th November, 2010, 9 people were accorded promotions. In the promotion order, it was indicated that 3 of the promotees are not qualified to be promoted. Disqualification of those 3 candidates, as was mentioned in the said order dated 9th November, 2010, was similar disqualification that the petitioner faced. We, accordingly, called upon the person, who signed the said promotion order, to file an affidavit and to indicate, how he could do what he did by the said order dated 9th November, 2010, as indicated above. An affidavit was filed where nothing was stated as to how such a course could be adopted. The only purported explanation was that Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) is not likely to be held in the near future. 2. This aspect of the matter we brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary of the State. At the intervention of the Chief Secretary of the State, promotions granted to those 3 people have since been cancelled. The petitioner’s grievance that he was sailing in the same boat as that of those 3 people, but there has been discrimination in between the petitioner and the said 3 people, now stands resolved. 3. In the circumstances, nothing further survives in the writ petition. The same is disposed of. 2 4. We, however, feel it necessary to incorporate in this order that in the event DPC is held for consideration of promotion of those 3 people or any other person in the near future, DPC shall consider the case of promotion of all other eligible candidates. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 28.04.2011 28.04.2011 Amit