Naresh Kumar And Ors vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

Since common question of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, therefore are being taken up together and are being adjudicated by this

common judgment. However, for sake of brevity facts of WPMS No. 3189 of 2017 are being considered.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-

According to the petitioners, they had participated in ‘Uttarakhand Rajya Andolan’. Since the authorities were not verifying the petitioners as

'Uttarakhand Rajya Andolankari’, therefore they filed Writ Petition (M/S) No.1124 of 2016, seeking a direction to the authorities to conclude the

process pertaining to their verification as ‘Uttarakhand Rajya Andolkari’ in a time bound manner. The said writ petition was disposed of with a

direction to the authorities to conclude the process of verification of petitioners as Rajya Andolkari within two months. Pursuant to the order dated

28.04.2016 passed in WPMS No.1124 of 2016, District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar examined the claim of petitioners and passed an order dated

24.08.2016 holding that in the absence of any evidence of petitioners participation in Rajya Andolan, they cannot be identified as ‘Uttarakhand

Rajya Andolkari’. This order passed by District Magistrate on 24.08.2016 has been challenged in the present writ petition.

Perusal of the impugned order indicates that there was no evidence, whatsoever, regarding petitioners’ participation in Rajya Andolan. No

record is available with the Local Intelligence Unit regarding their participation. Upon identification as Rajya Andolankari, certain benefits are

available to the concerned persons including pension. Therefore, the State Government has laid down certain criteria for identification as Rajya

Andolkari. Since the petitioners do not fulfill any of the criteria as prescribed in the Government Order dated 22.10.2008, the District Magistrate was

justified in rejecting their claims. As per the said Government Order, identification as Uttarakhand Rajya Andolankari has to be made on the basis of

the following documents:-

a) L.I.U. report

b) Other record available with the police, for example:- relevant extract of the daily dairy

c) F.I.R. in whatever form registered

d) Medical report from the hospital

e) Any other information based on document whose authenticity is verified by the District Magistrate

Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to one document which is a letter issued by the Office of Deputy Collector, Kichha, wherein it is

mentioned that petitioners had supplied some documents with his/her application in support of his/her claim that he/she participated in Rajya Andolan.

The said document is of no help to the petitioner, as evidence, if any, has to be available with the Local Intelligence Unit. The evidence supplied by the

petitioners along with their application cannot be relied upon in the absence of verification done by the District Magistrate. It is not the case of the

petitioners that the document supplied by the petitioners was duly verified by the District Magistrate. In such view of the matter, this Court does not

find any reason to interfere in the impugned rejection order dated 24.08.2016.

Accordingly, writ petitions fail and are dismissed. No order as to costs.