Ghananand Barthwal vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

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

"A. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order passed by respondent no.1 being letter no. 06 -Char-L(1)/XXXVI (1)/2015-42G/2001 Vol- II TC, dated 10-02-2015 (Annexure no.6 to the petition).

B. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to permit the petitioner to perform his duties as District Government Counsel (Civil), Nainital in view of the note clause of sub clause 6 of Clause 7.08 read with Clause 7.13 of the Legal Remembrance's Manual."

Petitioner was engaged as District Government Counsel (Civil) (hereinafter referred to as "DGC (Civil)"). Since petitioner was completing 62 years of age, which is the age of superannuation for Government Counsels, therefore, Secretary, Law Department asked District Magistrate, Naintal vide letter dated 10.02.2015 to prepare a Panel of three Lawyers and send the same to the State Government, with comments of the District Judge. In the said letter, it is mentioned that this exercise is undertaken as the present incumbent on the post of DGC (Civil) has attained age of superannuation. Engagement of DGC (Civil) is done as per the provisions contained in Legal Remembrance's Manual (hereinafter referred to as "L.R. Manual"), which is reproduced in para no.7 of the writ petition.

Clause 7.13 of the L.R. Manual, as reproduced in the writ petition, provides that age of superannuation of a Government Advocate would be 62 years and ordinarily there would be no renewal of term after age of 62 years, however, on fulfillment of certain conditions, one can be considered for appointment up to the age of 65 years. It is thus apparent that no one can be permitted to hold the Office of DGC (Civil), after completing 65 years of age.

According to the petitioner, he had applied for reappointment, in terms of Clause 7.13 of the L.R. Manual, therefore, the State Government was under a duty to consider his request. Petitioner has challenged inter departmental communication dated 10.02.2015 issued by Law Secretary. By the request made to District Magistrate, no prejudice was caused to petitioner as his engagement as DGC (Civil), was not terminated. Moreover renewal of professional engagement cannot be claimed as a matter of right, that too after completing age of superannuation. Although, L.R. Manual permits for reappointment of a person upon completing age of 62 years, however it is circumscribed by certain conditions, therefore, such reappointment also cannot be claimed as a right.

A Co-ordinate Bench had passed an interim order on 26.02.2015 and more than six years have gone by after passing of the interim order. Petitioner himself has admitted in the writ petition that engagement as D.G.C. (Civil) after completing 65 years of age, is not permissible. Petitioner had completed 62 years in the year 2015, therefore, he must have completed 65 years of age by now.

In such view of the matter, the relief as claimed by the petitioner does not survive.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order dated 26.02.2015 is vacated.