If one does not fulfill the criteria prescribed in the Government Policy for identification as Rajya Andolankari, they cannot claim to be declared as Rajya Andolankari: High Court of Uttarakhand.
Upon identification as Rajya Andolankari, a person becomes entitled to several benefits, monetary or otherwise, therefore, the State Government, in its wisdom, has laid down certain criteria for identification as Rajya Andolankari. Hence a person has to fulfill such criteria to be identified as Andolankari. A single Judge bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari, in the matter of Rohitash Thakur & others Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others (WRIT PETITION (M/S) No. 1300 of 2016), dealt with an issue where two writ petitions were heard and decided together because of common questions of fact and law, seeking To issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of “certiorari”, quashing the office order by the way of which the authority has refused to identify the petitioner as “Uttarakhand Rajya Andolankari” and to issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to take a fresh decision over the representations made by the petitioners.
In the present case, as per the petitioners, they participated in Uttarakhand Rajya Andolan. The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Competent Authority to conclude the process of verification of petitioners as Rajya Andolankari because the petitioners were not given the benefits that were available to Rajya Andolankari. The writ was disposed of by state counsel to make representation at district magistrate to consider it in the light of Government Policy. The district magistrate further rejected it, and thereby the petitioners approached this court.
Additional C.S.C pointed out the order passed by the District Magistrate that those petitioners could not produce any evidence in support of their claim that they had actively participated in the Uttarakhand Rajya Andolan. He also submitted that the petitioners did not have their name in the L.I.U. Report or in any other document enumerated in the Government Order. Further submitted that the only evidence the petitioner had to support his claim was a news item published in some local weekly newspaper named as ‘Laghu Bharat’. But also contended, that such news report could not be considered as a basis for the benefits to Rajya Andolankari.
The court observed that-“In the absence of any evidence in support of their claim, petitioners have no legally enforceable right to be declared as Rajya Andolankari.” Thereby the writ petition was rejected and dismissed.