IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Interim Relief App. No. 14257 of 2006 IN Writ Petition No. 1471 of 2006 (S/S) Pradeep Kumar Dixit Working as Accountant District Jail Haridwar District Haridwar (U.A.) ….....Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through Principal Secretary Home/Jail Administration Government of Uttaranchal Dehradun. 2. Inspector General of Jail Uttaranchal, Dehradun. ……….Respondents. Shri P.C. Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Sharma, learned Brief Holder for the respondents. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to relieve the petitioner from State of Uttarakhand for the State of U.P. forthwith, as the petitioner has been allocated State of U.P. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is an Accountant in District Jail Haridwar. Annexure-1 to the writ petition is copy of allocation order, passed 2 by Government of India, which provides that except the persons named in the enclosed list, other employees are allocated State of U.P. The petitioner’s name does not figure in the enclosed list of said order of Government of India, relating to officials serving with the jail administration. As such, the petitioner stands allocated State of U.P. 4. The order of allocation was passed by Government of India way back in December 2005. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, said fact is not denied. However, the reason for not relieving the petitioner, mentioned in the counter affidavit is that the employees who had to join in State of Uttarakhand, after getting relieved from State of U.P. have yet not come, as such, the petitioner could not be relieved. 5. If each of the State starts taking the above excuse for not relieving the employees, none of the employees can join their states allocated to them by Government of India. As such, the excuse taken by the respondents cannot be accepted and after the allocation order, passed by Government of India, the petitioner has a right to be relieved for State of U.P. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed with the direction that the petitioner be relieved from the State of Uttarakhand for the State of U.P. within a period of three months from the date of certified 3 copy of this order is produced before respondent No. 2. (Interim Relief Application No. 14257 of 2006, stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 01.08.2008 Sweta 4