JUDGMENT : (Vipin Sanghi, J.) 1. When the writ petition was heard by this Court on 23.11.2022, the following order was passed : “Mr. Sandep Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Joshi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1 to 4. The petitioner is an association of public servants/officers serving in the department of Horticulture and Food Processing. They have preferred the present writ petition to assail certain government orders, as being discriminatory. They have also assailed the seniority list dated 11.10.2022, issued by respondent No. 2. It appears to us that the claims made by the petitioner on behalf of public servants, can be raised before the Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976. The submission of leaned counsel for the petitioner is that, since the petitioner is an association, the petitioner association cannot maintain the claim petition before the said Tribunal, as only a person who is, or has been a public servant, can maintain a claim petition and the association, by itself, is not a person, who could be described as a public servant. Prima facie, we have difficulty in accepting this line of argument. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks an adjournment to place before us case law in this regard. At his request, list this case on 29.11.2022.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the following orders delivered by the Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal, Bench - Nainital : (a) Claim Petition No. 84/NB/DB/2020, Public Works Department Regular Work Charge Employee Union, Uttarakhand through it’s President, Sri Satish Chandra Vs State of Uttarakhand and another, decided on 15.12.2020. (b) Claim Petition No. 146/NB/SB/2022, Uttarakhand Van Beat/Van Arakshi Sangh, Uttarakhand, Derhadun, through its President Sri Harsh Vardhan Gariya Vs State of Uttarakhand and others, decided on 28.11.2022. 3. We have perused these orders. We are of the view that the Tribunal is absolutely wrong in holding that a claim petition cannot be maintained on behalf of an association of persons, who, otherwise, are entitled to maintain their claim petition before the Tribunal. Merely because they have organized themselves by forming an association to pursue their common cause, it does not mean that the Tribunal losses its jurisdiction to deal with the claim filed before the Tribunal by the association. Merely because they have organized themselves by forming an association to pursue their common cause, it does not mean that the Tribunal losses its jurisdiction to deal with the claim filed before the Tribunal by the association. At the same time, it would be necessary that, apart from the association, some individuals, who may be office bearers of the association, are also impleaded as party claimants along with the association. 4. We, accordingly, dismiss this petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal along with its office bearers.