HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 508 of 2009 (S/S) Chandan Singh Bisht. … Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and three others. … Respondents Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Advocate for petitioner, Mr. H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for the State/respondents. Dated: June 25,2009: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take petitioner’s services (as per petitioner’s suitability and eligibility) and to continue his services in the Forest Department. 3. The respondent no. 2 filed counter affidavit. In paragraph-3 of the counter affidavit it is mentioned that if the petitioner is ready to go to the Bijrani Range then he will be engaged as a labour in the Department and wages will be given to him. 4. During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner made statement at bar that the petitioner is ready to work as Labour in Bijrani Range. 5. Thus, keeping in view the averments made in paragraph-3 of the counter affidavit as also the statement made by counsel for the petitioner the writ petition is 2 disposed of with a direction that the respondent no.2 will provide work to the petitioner in Bijrani Range, as per the averments made in paragraph-3 of the counter affidavit. With this direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. 6. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) 25.06.2009 NCM: