Constable 1877 Mukesh Kumar And Others @JUDGMENTTAG-JUDGMENT State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

By means of the instant writ petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to grant relaxation to the petitioner in upper age limit in view of Rule 21 of Rules 2018 and to send the petitioners for Departmental Resrve Driving Course.

b) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

c) Award cost of the petition."

It is the case of the petitioner that they have been working in the Motor Transport Branch of the Police Department as Cleaner. Earlier to be eligible to join the Departmental Reserve Driving Course, the upper age limit was 32 years, by way of an order and subsequently this upper age limit was enhanced to 40 years in the year 2016. But, subsequent to it, Service Rules were made, in which, the upper age limit was prescribed as 35.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

It is the case of the petitioner that now recruitment is to be done for the post of Driver. Petitioners are eligible in all other aspects except the upper age limit. They have already crossed the upper age limit having been working in the police department for a long. Petitioners claim that they should have been given relaxation in the upper age limit, in view of Rule 21 of the Uttarakhand Police Motors Transport Branch Subordinate Service Rules, 2018 (for short, "2018 Rules").

At the very outset, the Court wanted to know, how Rule 21 of the 2018 Rules is applicable and as to why should this Court entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of the availability of alternate efficacious remedy from the State Public Services Tribunal, as constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners restrict their prayer seeking liberty to submit their representation to the respondents within a period of 10 days from today with further directions to the respondents to decide the representation within a given time.

Learned State counsel gives a statement that in case, such a representation is made by the petitioners, decision will be taken on it within a period of three weeks from the receipt of the representation.

The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned State counsel.

The writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to make a representation to the respondents within a period of 10 days from today with further directions to the respondents that upon such representation having been made, that shall be decided within a period of three weeks thereafter. But, in case, the dispute is still not resolved, even after consideration of the representation, any writ petition, on the subject, shall not be entertained by this Court merely on the ground that it is in sequel to the instant writ petition.