2025:UHC:10625 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS/ 1 4 8 9 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J 1. Mr. K.P. Upadhyaya, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M.C. Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner is serving as Chief Personal Officer in Collectorate, Dehradun. He has challenged the order dated 07.09.2024, passed by District Magistrate, Dehradun, whereby respondent no. 3 has been attached in the Camp Office of District Magistrate for discharging official work. 4. Petitioner contends that respondent no. 3 is serving as Collection Amin, yet he has been assigned all the duties of Camp Office of District Magistrate, which should have been assigned only to a person serving as Personal Assistant to District Magistrate. 5. Mr. K.P. Upadhyaya, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that respondent no. 3 is now acting as Personal Assistant to District Magistrate, although he is not entitled to hold the said designation, as he belongs to a different cadre altogether. 6. Learned State Counsel, however, refers to para 5 of counter affidavit filed by Mr. Savin Bansal, District Magistrate, Dehradun, where it is mentioned that District Magistrate has to perform various duties in Office as well as in the field level; there is no post meant to assist District Magistrate after duty hours in his residence/ camp office and in order to complete the official work in 2025:UHC:10625 a time bound manner, respondent no. 3 was attached for discharging routine and emergent work. It is further mentioned that respondent no. 3 is an experienced and competent employee, who earlier also performed duties in the Camp Office of District Magistrate, Dehradun for several years. 7. Learned State Counsel submits that service condition of petitioner is not in any manner affected by the order passed by District Magistrate, whereby respondent no. 3 was assigned duties in his camp office. He submits that petitioner does not have any locus standi as neither his status nor his emolument or other conditions of service in any manner are affected. He further submits that the stopgap arrangement has been done by District Magistrate in order to deliver goods to the public at large and there is no law, which prohibits District Magistrate to make necessary arrangement to ensure that he is able to discharge multifarious duties in a time bound manner. 8. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submits that District Magistrate, Dehradun may be directed to take decision on representation submitted by petitioner on 21.12.2024, within some stipulated time frame. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to District Magistrate, Dehradun to decide petitioner’s representation dated 21.12.2024, as per law, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J) 28.11.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea3 0f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A 58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.11.28 04:11:51 -08'00' 2025:UHC:10625