IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 272 (SS) of 2009 Kotwal Singh Verma …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. Lalit Mohan Verma, Advocate present for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned standing counsel present for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Lalit Mohan Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned standing counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner was appointed as a Compounder (Allopathic) in the Labour Department on 26.07.1975 in the erstwhile State of the Uttar Pradesh. In order to make out his case, the petitioner relies upon a government order dated 20.09.1980 vide which such Compounders, who were appointed prior to 1975 were exempted from training of the same and were also given the trained scale. Though the list along with the said government order was forwarded to the government of such Compounders who were appointed prior to 1.1.1977 but the name of the petitioner did not find mention and as such the petitioner was not given the benefit of the said government order. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in compliance of the direction of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court the representation of the petitioner was decided acknowledging that there is such a claim of the petitioner for the grant of the higher pay scale but it cannot be done on the level of the Labour Commissioner and the matter was sent for determination to the State Government. 2 This writ petition was filed in the year 2009 and during the pendency of the writ petition the petitioner reached the age of superannuation on 31.07.2010. In view of the above fact, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that if the petitioner moves a representation raising all his grievances before the Secretary, Labour, Government of Uttarakhand, the same shall be decided by the said authority who shall pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) Dated: 30.08.2011 VKG