HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 483 of 2025 Subhash Chand ….....Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ….….Respondents Present:- Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Bisht, Addl. CSC for the State. JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) It is the case of the petitioner that he has been working as Health Worker (Male) in Primary Health Centre Dadamandi, District Pauri Garhwal. He has not been granted promotion, whereas his co-employee Ashok Kumar Tripathi was promoted as Health Supervisor (Male) in the year 2018. The petitioner seeks similar treatment. The petitioner seeks direction to the respondent no. 3/the Chief Medical Officer, District Pauri Garhwal to relax the condition of six months training for promotion of the petitioner to the position of Health Supervisor (Male). It is the case of the petitioner that by virtue of order dated 15.06.2018 passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1603 of 2018 (“the first petition”), the co-employee has been given relaxation. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Health Worker (Male); he is otherwise entitled for promotion to the post of Health Supervisor (Male); he has not undergone six month’s training, but this eligibility can be relaxed by 2 the respondent authority, but it is not being done. He would submit that similarly placed co-worker Ashok Kumar Tripathi had earlier filed the first petition, which was decided by this Court on 15.06.2018 and after recording the facts, the Court passed the following order:- “In this eventuality, this Court feels that taking into consideration the fact that petitioner has attained the age of 59 years, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Chief Medical Officer, Pauri Garhwal to take an appropriate decision on the representation dated 28th March, 2018 within a period of six weeks from today, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.” It is argued that subsequently Mr. Ashok Kumar Tripathi was promoted. The petitioner seeks same treatment. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he may be permitted to move a fresh representation and the same may be decided in accordance with law. 5. Learned State Counsel does not dispute the factual aspects. He would submit that in case the representation is given by the petitioner, it shall be decided within a period of six weeks. 6. It is admitted to the parties that similarly situated person had earlier filed the first petition, which was decided on 15.06.2018. Therefore, the instant petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the respondent no. 3/Chief Medical Officer, Pauri Garhwal within a week. The respondent no. 3 is directed that if such application is filed by the 3 petitioner within a week, the same shall be decided within a period of six weeks from today after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 01.05.2025 Avneet/