2025:UHC:6903-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/164/2013 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) There is no representation for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Puran Singh Bisht, Addl. C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos.2 to 5. 3. Mr. I.D. Paliwal, Standing Counsel for State of U.P./respondent nos.6 to 9. 4. This writ petition was filed in the year 2013 for the following reliefs:- “(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to finally allocate the service of petitioner to State of Uttarakhand. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of Medical Officer (Community Health) from the date when the junior incumbent was regularized in service, considering the past satisfactory service of 24 years of petitioner and in accordance with Regularization Rules 2002 and further to grant all admissible promotion pay scale and other consequential benefits to the petitioner.” 5. As per the pleadings made in the writ petition, petitioner was given adhoc appointment as Medical Officer, (Community Health) in District Haridwar in the year 1988. Thereafter, she served in various other districts of erstwhile 2025:UHC:6903-DB State of U.P. Subsequently, she was relieved for State of Uttarakhand and she joined duties as Medical Officer, Community Health in Uttarakhand in 2005. Since her services were not considered for regularization, therefore, she has filed this writ petition. 6. Learned State Counsel rightly submits that under The Uttar Pradesh Reorganization Act, an adhoc or causal employee is not liable to be allotted to any successor State. Thus, the relief as sought in prayer no.(i) cannot be granted. 7. As regards the second prayer, learned State Counsel fairly submits that if petitioner has served continuously in Uttarakhand and she also meets other conditions of The Regularization Rules, 2013, then she can make a representation to the Competent Authority, who shall examine her claim for regularization. 8. We, accordingly, dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to make representation to the Competent Authority. If she makes representation within three weeks from today, the Competent Authority shall examine her claim, as per applicable Rules, and take appropriate decision as per law, within eight weeks thereafter. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 06.08.2025 06.08.2025 Rajni RAJINI GUSAIN Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48448ac3 701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4DF4F C80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A158A0A8 78BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2025.08.07 17:44:53 +05'30'