Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12785 (UTT)

NEERAJ KUMAR GUPTA v. UNION OF INDIA

WPSB/555/2018 · 2025-06-16

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Subhash Upadhyay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:4972-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB No.555 of 2018 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. Mr. Suresh Chandra Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Devendra Singh, learned counsel for the State. 3. Petitioner was appointed as Junior Clerk in the office of Chief Medical Officer, Haridwar in the year 1992. At the time of State Reorganization, he opted for State of Uttarakhand, however, subsequently he submitted another option for State of Uttar Pradesh. Thereafter, he made a representation that due to changed circumstances, he wants to serve in State of Uttarakhand. This representation was rejected by Central Government vide order dated 04.12.2015. 4. In view of the above, the petitioner filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- i) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 04.12.2015 and 24.02.2016 passed by respondents. ii) Issue a writ order or direction iin the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents the petitioner shall not relieve for the State of Uttar Pradesh, as per his first option dated 4.10.2000. iii) Issue any other or further writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 5. Today, Mr. Suresh Chandra Bhatt, 2025:UHC:4972-DB learned counsel for petitioner makes a statement at the Bar that during pendency of the writ-petition, the matter was reconsidered by the State Advisory Committee and now petitioner has been finally allocated to State of Uttarakhand. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of this development the relief as prayed in the petition does not survive. 7. In view of the above statement made by Mr. S.C. Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is dismissed as infructuous. (Subhash Upadhyay,J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 16.06.2025 Kaushal/SS 2025:UHC:4972-DB