Jai Prakash Yadav vs State and Others

B.S. Verma, J.—Heard.

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

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the matter of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 3 to decide the case of the Petitioner which has been already presented before him vide representation dated 15- 12-2010 and 10-01-2011(Annexure Nos. 2 and 3).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 3 to ask to appear Respondent No. 6 and the Petitioner and provide personal hearing later on take any decision in the case of the promotion of the Respondent No. 6.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 3,4 and 5 to not disturb the Petitioner peaceful functioning of the Assistant Clerk till the decision of the present case.

(iv) Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

(v) Award cost of the writ petition in favour of the Petitioner.

During the course of argument, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the writ petition be disposed of directing the Respondent No. 3 i.e. District Education Officer, Udham Singh Nagar, to decide the representations dated 15-12-2010 and 10-01-2011 (Annexure Nos. 2 and 3 to the writ petition).

Prayer made is innocuous.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to Respondent No. 3 i.e. District Education Officer, Udham Singh Nagar to decide the representations dated 15-12-2010 and 10-01-2011 (annexure Nos. 2 and 3 to the writ petition) of the Petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

All applications stand disposed of accordingly.