Uttarakhand High Court
Gyanesh Chhibber vs Union Of India And Others on 7 November, 2017
Author: Sudhanshu Dhulia
Bench: Sudhanshu Dhulia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 319 of 2016
Gyanesh Chhibber .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 320 of 2016
Vinay Kumar Sharma .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 327 of 2016
Mukesh Kumar Arora .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 331 of 2016
Sanjay Chouniyal .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 330 of 2016
Virendra Kumar .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
2
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 329 of 2016
G. Muthu Veerappan .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 321 of 2016
Neeraj Gupta .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 322 of 2016
Kuldeep Chauhan .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 323 of 2016
Ummed Singh .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 326 of 2016
Chandan Singh Aswal .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
3
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 328 of 2016
Harikrishan Gupta .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 324 of 2016
Pyar Chand Singh Aswal .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 325 of 2016
Shashi Bala .............Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others .........Respondents
Present: Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun.
Hon'ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 in Court today is taken on record.
2. The petitioners before this Court seek absorption in the Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, since they have been working in the Institute for the last 20 years. All the same, since the Wildlife Institute of India was making direct recruitment, the petitioners have approached this Court.
43. During the pendency of the writ petition, learned counsel for the Wildlife Institute of India, Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal has filed an affidavit annexing the recommendation of the Director, Wildlife Institute of India, wherein it has been stated that considering the long years of service of the petitioners, their absorption be considered and thereafter the posts be abolished after the petitioners reach the age of superannuation.
4. This seems to be fair considering the long years of service of the petitioners. Writ petitions are therefore disposed with the direction to the Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Government of India to consider the recommendation of the Director, Wildlife Institute of India dated 17.10.2017 and pass appropriate orders thereon preferably within one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 07.11.2017 Avneet/