2025:UHC:5716 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Single No. 1115 of 2025 04th July, 2025 Meena Daffoti ………..Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Ms. Mamta Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.K. Papnoi, Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. B.S. Bisht, Advocate for respondent nos.3 and 4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has sought indulgence of this Court seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider petitioner for promotion on the post of Junior Clerk, based on her educational qualification and experience, after constituting a Departmental Promotion Committee. 2. Facts of the case as narrated by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner was appointed in the year 2006 as a Class-IV Employee (Beldar) in Nagar Palika Parishad under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand) on the place of her father, who died in harness. 3. Now the petitioner submits that she has been working on Class-III Post after assigning work of Class-III by Nagar Palika Parishad since the year 2008; therefore she wants her to be promoted on Class-III Post, keeping in view her educational qualification and work experience. 1 2025:UHC:5716 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has submitted her representation to respondent no.2-Director, Urban Development Department, on 09.05.2025, which is annexed as annexure no.20 to the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has limited her argument to the extent that if a direction is made to the respondent no.2-Director, Urban Development Department, to decide representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, the grievance of the petitioner would be redressed. 6. Since the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be innocuous, there is no objection from the side of counsel for the respondent(s) if such an order is passed by this Court. 7. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed-off and it is provided that respondent no.2-Director, Urban Development Department, shall consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.05.2025, annexure no.20 to the writ petition, strictly in accordance with law and pass appropriate order, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 04.07.2025 SK 2