R.K. Verma vs State of Uttarakhand and others.

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

"1) issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari by quashing the impugned orders dated 8th August 2017 (Annexure-1 (Colly) to the writ petition) vide which the officiating appointment as In-Charge Executive Engineer of the private Respondent no. -30 has been made without properly considering the seniority of the petitioner as Assistant Engineer working in the Department of Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan since the date of his officiating promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer i.e. 18.05.2010 in continuation to his regular promotion on 9.4.2013 and there after his working as Officiating Executive Engineer since 27.09.2014 to till date uninterruptedly at Pithorgarh and Champawat Divisions of Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan contained as Annexure-7 (Coll), Annexure-8 (Colly), Annexure- 3(Colly) & Annexure -2 (Colly) to the writ petition. 2.) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari by quashing the impugned seniority list dated 6th July, 2017 contained as Annexure-4 (Colly) to the writ petition. 3.) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to prepare and issue a fresh seniority list and the petitioner''s name be figured at appropriate serial number in the list by counting his seniority on the basis of his substantive appointment as Junior Engineer dated 3.7.1986 by counting his officiating appointment as Assistant Engineer since 18.5.2010 in continuation to his regular promotion dated 9.4.2013. 4.) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Official Respondents no. 1 & 2 to hold the DPC & consider the case of the petitioner for regular promotion to the post of Executive Engineer taking into consideration of his continuous officiation on the post of Assistant Engineer for about 7 years & 3 months since 18.05.2010 to regular promotion i.e. 09.04.2013 & till date."

We heard Mr. L.K. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned counsel for respondent no. 2, besides the State Counsel Mr. C.S. Rawat.

Essentially, the complaint of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been officiating as an Executive Engineer for past three years. He is about to be replaced by his junior. There is reference to seniority list and the petitioner challenges the seniority list also before this Court.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the petitioner should be relegated to approach the Public Service Tribunal, where he can seek all reliefs. We also make it clear that it will be open for the petitioner to press for and seek interim relief also and it is for the Tribunal to consider and pass appropriate orders in this regard. Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to approach the Tribunal and leaving open all the contentions, we dispose of the writ petition. We request the Tribunal to dispose of the matter at the earliest, if the petitioner approaches the Tribunal as per law.

Let certified copy of this judgment be issued today itself.