IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 789(S/S) OF 2010 Virendra Singh Negi and others ….Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others .Respondents. Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/State. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. (Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.) Heard Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. N.P. Sah, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/State and Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for respondents 2 and 3. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought the writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent no1, to create as many posts of vehicle drivers as the vehicles are there in the Mussorrie Dehradun Development Authority in compliance of Government Order Nos. 3159/XXX(2006) dated 19-12- 2006 and 3160/XXX(2006) dated 19.12.2006. Further prayer is made to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to ensure strict compliance of above Government Orders. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the petitioners have given their representation, Annexure No.9 to the writ petition, before respondent No.1 for redressal of their grievance, but the same is still pending. Therefore, the respondent No.1 be directed to decide the same by a speaking and reasoned order and the writ petition may be disposed of today. Prayer is innocuous. 2 In view of above, the respondent No.1 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioners, Annexure No.9 to the writ petition, by a speaking and reasoned order thereon, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S. Verma, J.) Dated: 01-09-2010 ISB