Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/117/2019 on 12 February, 2026
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
D1-
10(2) WPSS No.117 of 2019
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.
Mr. H.K. Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate (through video conferencing) assisted by Mr. Amit Satyawali, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Ramesh Chandra Joshi and Mr. Tarun Mohan, Brief Holder for the State.
Delay in filing rejoinder affidavit is condoned. Rejoinder affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application, IA No.2545 of 2023, stands disposed of, accordingly.
Supplementary affidavit is taken on record. Miscellaneous Application, IA No.2548 of 2025, stands disposed of, accordingly.
Heard on Amendment Application, IA No.2547 of 2025.
By way of the amendment application, the petitioners propose to add prayer iii-b- to the effect that the respondents may be directed to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from September, 1999 to 09.09.2010 (entire illegal disengagement period) with deemed continuity, etc. Objections have been filed by the respondents, inter alia, on the ground that the petitioners did not challenge the termination order dated 09.09.2010. As a consequence thereto, the petitioners did not work for the department with effect from 01.09.1999 to 09.10.2010.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already challenged their disengagement by way of Relief iii-a). Now, by way of the proposed amendment, the petitioners claim the continuity of service and all the consequential benefits post declaring the disengagement null and void.
Learned State Counsel submits that the petitioners have not challenged their disengagement.
In fact, the Relief iii-a) in the petition is with regard to declaring the disengagement of the petitioners as null and void. Though, this does not reveal as to when was the disengagement made. Now, the proposed Relief iii-b- is with regard to continuity of services and consequential benefits after declaring the disengagement null and void, which, according to the petitioners, was for a period from September, 1999 to 09.09.2010. In fact, it has been more specifically disclosed in their objections by the respondents as from 01.09.1999 to 09.09.2010. The petitioners are just explaining the already claimed reliefs and making further relief post grant of Relief-iii-a).
Having considered, this Court is of the view that the amendment application may be allowed.
The amendment application is allowed. Let the proposed amendment be carried out and the amended petition be filed within a week.
Learned State Counsel submits that they would like to file supplementary counter affidavit.
Let it be so filed within next three weeks. Two weeks, thereafter, rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed.
List this matter on 10.04.2026 for final hearing.
(Ravindra Maithani J.) 12.02.2026 RV