Uttarakhand High Court
Dr. Sakshi Tewari And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 27 February, 2026
2026:UHC:1417-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
27TH FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION (S/B) No. 103 OF 2026
Dr. Sakshi Tewari and others.
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioners. : Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel
assisted by Mr. Mohd. Shafy, learned
counsel.
Counsel for respondent no. 1. : Mr. P.S. Bisht, learned Additional Chief
Standing Counsel for the State of
Uttarakhand.
Counsel for respondent no. 2. : Mr. S.S. Lingwal, learned counsel.
Counsel for respondent no. 3. : Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned counsel.
JUDGMENT :(per Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
1. The petitioners are presently working as Assistant Professors in Soban Singh Jeena University (respondent no. 3 herein). Their initial appointment was on contractual basis, on a fixed salary, with respondent no. 2. The case of the petitioners is that, before they were appointed on contractual basis, they had passed the recruitment process. They claim to be working without any interruption, or breakage. Some of the contractual employees, who were senior to the petitioners, were regularized by the Executive Council of respondent no. 2 on 22.10.2018. The Regularization Rules, 2013 were duly 1 2026:UHC:1417-DB adopted by respondent no. 2. However, before the case of the petitioners could be taken up for regularization, the Regularization Rules came to be challenged before this Court in WPSB No. 616/2018. The said Writ Petition was decided by this Court, by judgment dated 22.02.2024, and this Court ordered modification of the 2013 Rules, so that, after 04.12.2018, only those, who had completed 10 years' period of service, would be entitled for regularization. The provision for regularization of service, on completing five years' service, was, accordingly, read down, and was confined to those, who were regularized prior to 04.12.2018. It seems that, thereafter, the State Government carried out amendment in the Regularization Rules.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by issuance of an advertisement by respondent no. 3 for filling up various posts of Assistant Professors in the subjects of Commerce, Sociology, Physics, Psychology, Geography etc. (Annexure No.
2). They are claiming right to be considered for regularization, and they have also challenged the vires of Clause 4(1) of the Daily Wage, Work-Charge, Contract, Fixed-Pay, Part Time and Ad-hoc Employees Regularization Rules, 2013, as amended by Amendment Rules, 2025, contending that the amendment, carried out by Amendment Rules, 2025, is against the spirit of 2 2026:UHC:1417-DB the judgment dated 22.02.2024, passed in WPSB No. 616/2018, and other connected matters.
3. On the last date, we granted time to learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 & 3 to obtain instructions, as to whether the Regularization Rules, 2013, and the amendments made therein, have been adopted by the University, or not.
4. Shri S.S. Lingwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2-University, on instructions, states that respondent no. 2 had adopted the Regularization Rules long back.
5. Shri C.S. Rawat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3-University, submits that the Regularization Rules have not been adopted by respondent no.3.
6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has invited our attention towards Office Order dated 31.12.2025, issued by Registrar, Soban Singh Jeena University (respondent no. 3 herein), whereby a Committee of six persons has been constituted, under the Chairmanship of Professor P.S. Bisht, Director M.S.J. Compound, Almora, to consider the case for regularization of services of daily wagers, work-charge, 3 2026:UHC:1417-DB contract, fixed-pay, part-time and ad-hoc employees working in the University.
7. Thus, from the material brought on record, it is evident that respondent no. 3 has itself constituted a six member committee to accord consideration to the claim of regularization of the services of the contractual employees as well, and which would definitely include the petitioners herein.
8. As the University is yet to take decision, as to whether the services of the petitioners have to be regularized, or not, therefore, in our opinion, at this stage, if the University is permitted to fill up all the posts, it would create complications, and may also defeat the claim of the petitioners for regularization.
9. Shri C.S. Rawat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3-University states that large number of posts of Assistant Professors are lying vacant, and the teaching is getting affected. The University may, therefore, be permitted to go ahead with the recruitment process, and, in order to secure the interest of the petitioners, pending consideration of their case for regularization, the University would not fill up eight vacancies.
4
2026:UHC:1417-DB
10. Having regard to the facts of the case, and the submissions made, we dispose of the Writ Petition, by providing that respondent no. 3 may go ahead with the recruitment process, in pursuance of advertisement dated 10.02.2026, but it shall not fill up eight posts, in pursuance of the said advertisement, till such time the case of the petitioners is considered for regularization by the Committee constituted in pursuance of the order dated 31.12.2025.
11. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
______________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
___________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
Dt: 27th February, 2026 Rahul Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI RAHUL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e66e 61bf4c848741983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, PRAJAPATI postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8A19 2FCAD15C390A1AAD7B39857D2540AE4C28A4 898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2026.02.27 16:08:00 +05'30' 5