STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. DEV RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite time having been granted, no counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondent-writ petitioner to the application seeking condonation of delay. Even before us Mr. Hem Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner, does not raise any objection for the delay to be condoned. The delay in preferring the appeal is condoned, and the Delay Condonation Application is disposed of.

(2.) The respondent-writ petitioner filed Writ Petition (S/S) No.2563 of 2015 seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned letter dtd. 19/11/2015 issued by the fourth respondent; a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to permit him to participate in the selection process for the post of Forest Guard as a departmental candidate; and a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to issue experience certificate/work certificate to the petitioner for participating in the selection process for the post of Forest Guard.

(3.) Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the appellants herein issued an advertisement for the post of Forest Guard and fixed the date for physical examination from 18/10/2015 to 20/10/2015; on his appearing in the physical examination, the petitioner was declared successful; however, no written examination was held thereafter; by proceedings dtd. 19/11/2015, the Deputy Director informed the petitioner that, in terms of the earlier proceedings dtd. 24/9/2015, his case for being considered for appointment as a Forest Guard could not be acceded to, as he did not fall within the category of a Seasonal Worker; and was therefore ineligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Forest Guard.