MADAN LAL POKHRIYAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Vinod Nautiyal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State of Uttaranchal, who has accepted notices on behalf of Respondents.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, Petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.07.2002 passed by District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal accepting the application of the Petitioner dated 19 -06 -2002 for voluntary retirement from service to be effective with effect from 30 -09 -2002; order dated 21 -01 -2003 passed by District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal rejecting the application of the Petitioner dated 23 -09 -2002 by which the Petitioner has sought withdrawal of earlier application dated 19 -06 -2002 and order dated 10 -09 -2004 passed by the Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal, Pauri Garhwal rejecting the appeal of the Petitioner preferred against the order dated 21 -01 -2003 and 22 -07 -2002 passed by District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal.

(3.) THE Petitioner made a representation disclosing the whole incident relating to the behaviour and attitude of Respondent No. 5 towards the Petitioner and requested the District Magistrate to inquire into the matter. The application was submitted by the Petitioner to the District Magistrate, through Tehsildar, who was immediate officer of the Petitioner. Simultaneously, Petitioner also applied for two months leave on the same date. There were 177 days leave due credit in the account of the Petitioner on the date when the application was moved by the Petitioner for two months leave.