IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTATRAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1176 (S/S) of 2006 Surendra Dutt Petwal Aged about 37 years, S/o Pitamber Dutt Petwal, R/o Sector – 5 (A), Room No. 124, Muldhar, Baurari, New Tehri, District – Tehri Garhwal ------- Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Revenue Department Dehradun 2. District Magistrate, New Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal 3. Sub Divisional Magistrate, New Tehri 4. Tehsildar, Tehsil, Pratap Nagar, Tehri Garhwal ------- Respondents Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: 1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 27.07.2006 and the order dated 07.04.2006 (Annexure No. 15 and 18 to the writ petition). 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in pursuance of the appointment letter, which was issued to the petitioner on 04.02.2004 by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehri. 3. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent, i.e., District Magistrate, Tehri, to issue a fresh appointment letter to Class IV post to the 2 petitioner keeping in view the earlier service rendered by the petitioner in pursuance to the existing vacant post as has been advertised. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed by the Additional District Magistrate, Tehri vide order dated 04.02.2004 as Seasonal Collection Peon, Dhanolti on the post, which fell vacant due to appointment of Shri Rakesh Prasad Bhatt in Nazarat Establishment by the respondents, who was earlier working as Collection Peon. One Sri Bhagwati Prasad Uniyal, aggrieved with the order dated 04.03.2003 by which the services of Sri Bhagwati Prasad Uniyal were terminated, preferred Writ Petition No. 01 of 2003 (SS) and this court in the aforesaid writ petition on 19th May, 2004 directed the respondents to take necessary step for appointment of Shri Bhagwati Prasad Uniyal as Seasonal Collection Peon. Thereafter, the respondents providing appointment to Shri Bhagwati Prasad Uniyal, has terminated the services of Shri Surendra Dutt Petwal, the present petitioner from the post of Seasonal Collection Peon. Aggrieved with the order passed by the respondents terminating the services of the petitioner, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 1001 of 2004 (SS) for quashing of the termination order dated 15th July, 2004. This Court disposed of the writ petition on 22nd February, 2006 with the observation that liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the authority concerned for fresh appointment. If such a representation is filed, 3 the same shall be decided on its own merit within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order, if possible, for a period of six weeks. One post shall be kept vacant for him. In pursuance of this observation issued by the Court, the petitioner preferred representation which has been finally disposed of by the District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal on 27th July, 2006. While rejecting the representation of the petitioner, the District Magistrate has stated that since Shri Surendra Dutt Petwal, present petitioner is not service since 2004, it is not possible to adjust him against the newly created post of Seasonal Collection Peon. The petitioner applied for appointment, however, his application was rejected by the Deputy Collector, who is Incharge, Land Record, Tehri Garhwal rejected the application on 27th July, 2006 on two grounds. First, that the petitioner has not renewed his registration with the Employment Exchange and second, he has become over age. So far the first ground is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that his registration has already been renewed up to 2009 and for the rejection of application, this ground is wholly unsustainable. So far the second ground is concerned, which relates the petitioner being over-age is concerned, the petitioner has relied upon a Government Order dated 28th December, 2006, wherein the provision for relaxation of age in pursuance to Uttaranchal Lok Seva (Relaxation of Age for Recruitment) Rules, 2003, has been referred. Thus prima facie, it appears that the Government has already made a provision for relaxation of age in respect of those 4 persons, who have already worked as Seasonal Collection Amin/ Peon for recruitment on these posts, which have recently been created by the State of Uttarakhand. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that two posts of Collection Peon are still vacant in the District and he has filed a supplementary affidavit to this effect. In the circumstances, I deem it fit and proper to direct the petitioner to produce the document showing that his registration is already renewed up to 2009 and the respondents may take necessary action for providing appointment to the petitioner in view of the relevant Rules and Government Order aforesaid in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of this order along with the relevant documents by the petitioner before the respondents. With this direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) 07.05.2007 VKS