IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1488 (MS) of 2009 Jitendra Prasad …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. R.C. Tamta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents no. 1 to 4. Dated: 17.09.2009 Hon’ble V. K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents no. 1 to 4 to start the construction work of Scheduled Caste Boys hostel in Rath Mahavidyalaya Paithani, Pauri Garhwal and also for quashing of the orders dated 18.09.2007, 19.09.2007 and 29.09.2007 passed by the State Government by which the construction of the hostel work was stopped. A counter affidavit of Smt. Manisha Panwar, Secretary, Social Welfare, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun has been filed in which it has been mentioned that on some complaint the construction work was stopped during the pendency of inquiry. The inquiry was conducted and inquiry report of the District Social Welfare Officer forwarded by the District Magistrate vide letter dated 15.11.2008 was not received by the Government in time. On receiving the said inquiry the same was examined by the Government and it was found that the complaint did 2 not have any substance. Consequently, the Government decided to lift the ban on construction and start the work without delay. In this regard Government Order No. 575/XVII-I/2009-11 (10)/2005 dated 19.06.2009 the Director, Social Welfare and the District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal were asked to ensure to start the construction work (copy of the G.O. dated 19.06.2009 annexed as Annexure-1 to the counter affidavit) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that about three years have passed but construction work has not been started. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that the District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal shall take steps to start the construction work without further delay. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) VKG 17.09.2009