Uttarakhand High Court
Ram Gopal Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 16 November, 2022
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 2152 of 2019
Ram Gopal Singh ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
With
Writ Petition No. 2147 of 2019
Jasram Singh ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
With
Writ Petition No. 2148 of 2019
Rajesh Singh ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
With
Writ Petition No. 2149 of 2019
Braham Pal Singh ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
2
With
Writ Petition No. 2150 of 2019
Dharam Pal Singh ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
With
Writ Petition No. 2151 of 2019
Chhotey Singh ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
With
Writ Petition No. 2265 of 2019
Ramesh Singh Tyagi ...............Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents
Mr. M.C.Kandpal, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. Chitrarth
Kandpal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. C.S.Rawat, learned Chief Standing Counsel, assisted by Mr.
V.S.Rawat, Brief Holder for the State.
Mr. V.K.Kaparwan, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 4.
Hon'ble Mr. Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
1. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these writ petitions, therefore, these writ petitions are 3 decided together. However, the Writ Petition No. 2152 of 2019 is considered as the leading case.
2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to pay the arrears of the salary on the basis of the VI and VII Pay Commission.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to regularize the services of the petitioner in the department.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may think deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
3. Petitioners served as Scaler in the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and retired from service on different dates.
4. Mr. V. K. Kaparwan, appearing for the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation has drawn attention of 4 this Court to para 4 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed by Akash Kumar Verma, Regional Manager (Garhwal Region), Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation, Kotdwar, Pauri Garhwal, in which, it is stated that the arrears of 6th and 7th Pay Revsion has been granted to the petitioners and other similarly situate persons.
5. Mr. M. C. Kandpal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners does not dispute the said averments and he fairly submitted that the amount of arrears has already been paid. However, he submits that the prayer regarding regularization is yet to be considered.
6. Mr. Kaparwan submits that the petitioners may make representation regarding regularization of their service and if they make representation within two weeks, the decision thereupon shall be taken within six weeks thereafter. The statement made by the learned counsel Mr. Kaparwan is taken on record.
7. All the above writ petitions stand disposed of.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 16.11.2022 Kaushal