2025:UHC:219 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS No. 24 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India. 3. Mr. Vikas Pande, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4. 4. By the instant writ petition the petitioners are praying for the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing in part the order dated 29.08.2024 (contained as Annexure No. 09 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent authority to the extent the petitioner has been regularized on the post of Assistant Grade-III instead of Technical Assistant Grade-II and further to the extent that the services of the petitioner have been regularized w.e.f. 31.10.2018 and not from the date of initial appointment of the petitioner and be pleased to modify the same to the extent that the services of the petitioner be directed to be regularized on the post of Assistant Grade-III instead of Technical Assistant Grade-II from the date of his initial appointment with all consequential benefits. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of Technical Assistant Grade-II along with all consequential benefits with effect from initial date of appointment of the petitioner with the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue as raised in this writ petition are in fact covered by the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench dated 13.12.2024 in bunch of writ petitions, the leading one is WPSS No. 797 of 2023 ‘Vinay Kumar Sharma vs. Wildlife Institute of India through Director and Others’. 6. Learned counsel for Union of India Mr. Rajesh Sharma as well as learned counsel for rest 2025:UHC:219 of the respondents Mr. Vikas Pande, who appeared through V.C., also fairly submits that the issue as raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the said judgment. 7. In addition to this, learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Piyush Garg also submits in respect of the relief no. 1 that it is slightly different to the issue decided by the Coordinate Bench for which the petitioner already submitted a representation. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment and the respondents are also directed to decide the representation in respect of relief no. 1 as sought in this writ petition within the same period. 9. The entire exercise be completed by the respondents in the light of the aforesaid judgment as well as to decide the representation in respect of relief no. 1 within four weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 07.01.2025 PR POOJA Digitally signed by POOJA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=20de6817a968f6b259137535cd20ae0aabc07 1792cf3b967c166f1f9777d2df9, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=C1F86C3C515DA418A38C7E1A6038906 8B79D0D8CDF244993ED8CB408A9121FC3, cn=POOJA Date: 2025.01.10 12:12:27 +05'30' 2025:UHC:219