AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.S. Verma, J.—Heard Mr. I.D. Paliwal, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the Respondents.
By means of this writ petition, the Petitioner has sought following relief:
i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to give appointment under dying in harness rules to the Petitioner in place of his father in the said department, in accordance of his qualification.
ii) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case
iii) Award the cost of the writ petition to the Petitioner.
During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that representation, made by the Petitioner is still pending and therefore he prays that Respondent No. 2 may be directed to take decision on the same.
The prayer made is innocuous.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of finally directing the Executive Engineer, Uttarakhand Pey Jal Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman Nigam, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar (Respondent No. 2), to take decision on the representation of the Petitioner for his appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules, in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Interim Relief Application No. 9647 of 2010 stands disposed of accordingly.