2025:UHC:6613-DB No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPSB No.563 of 2021 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) Mr. Pulak Raj Mullick, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Susheel Vashisht, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 3. Petitioner is a public servant as defined under Section 2(b) of the Public Service Tribunal Act, 1976. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “(a) issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari, quashing the representation for promotion of the petitioner dated 03.05.2017 (Annexure No. 6) by a Government order no. 186/2017 dated 19.05.2017 (passed by respondent no.3 i.e Chairman, Uttarakhand Commercial Tax Tribunal), on the strength of the Government order no. 293/2017/33(100)/XXVII(8)/01 dated 24.04.2017 GO No.145/2016/33(100)/XXVII(8)/01 dated 17.02.2016, passed by respondent no. 1 i.e. the Secretary (Finance), Govt. of Uttarakhand (Annexure No. 7(colly)); and to hold that the same is patently illegal and non-est in law and is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (b) issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to correct the patent errors in the Government order no. 186/2017 dated 19.05.2017 (passed by respondent no. 3 i.e Chairman, Uttarakhand Commercial Tax Tribunal) r/w GO dated 24.04.2017 & 17.02.2016 (Annexure No. 7(colly)); and to retrospectively promote the 2025:UHC:6613-DB petitioner w.e.f. 28.03.2017, by creating a post of Chief Administrative Officer in the Uttarakhand Commercial Tax Tribunal; and to hold, that the petitioner was eligible to be promoted to the post of "Chief Administrative Officer" with applicable pay benefits retrospectively i.e. w.e.f. 28.03.2017; and also to hold, that the same, is in accordance with the Office Memorandum dated 26.07.2016, issued by respondent no. 2 (Annexure No. 5);” 4. Learned State Counsel submits that petitioner has statutory remedy for approaching Public Service Tribunal established under the aforesaid Act. 5. Learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute the above submission made by learned State Counsel. 6. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the Public Service Tribunal. 7. Petitioner shall be entitled to claim benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act for excluding the time spent in pursing remedy before this Court. 8. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 29.07.2025 SS SUKHBANT SINGH Digitally signed by SUKHBANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=71978f9c61bfde0ba69967c787b1764ea7bc7d d129a8a6380d49b1885e628615, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=2D8B71B8D8E345F6B7F95B1DD4FB4BE BD2B7D72C42261361AED33172F152148D, cn=SUKHBANT SINGH Date: 2025.08.02 17:56:30 +05'30'