The petitioner is in no manner responsible for non-joining of Satye Singh Aswal at the transferred place, the Counsel for the petitioner submitted. According to him, the respondent-authority is not justified in passing the impugned order against the petitioner for a lapse committed by Satye Singh Aswal.
The Uttarakhand High Court has directed the competent authorities to consider the representation made by the petitioner and take appropriate decision by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks, regarding claim of regular appointment on the post of Accounts Clerk.
Sandeep Kothari, Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the first Contract, namely, Construction of Baffle Range was to be completed on or before 31.12.2020 and the said work was completed by the Petitioner well within the stipulated time.
The appeal of the petitioner will be treated as a representation on merits, the court said and asked that there should be a speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks.
Shashank Upadhyaya Counsel for respondent very fairly submitted that Petitioner is entitled to benefit of the order passed by the Supreme Court and the writ petition may be allowed on this ground alone.
The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday directed the Vice-Chancellor of the ICFAI University, Dehradun to consider and decide the petitioner’s appeal in accordance with law, as early as possible, but not later than May 15.
The Uttarakhand High Court on Wednesday issued comprehensive directives on several issues concerning the critical situation arising out of the Covid pandemic. In one directive, the bench suggested that the state employ dental surgeons to supplement the work of overworked doctors.