Uttarakhand High Court
Murad Ali vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 28 December, 2023
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1353 of 2023
Murad Ali ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
With
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1354 of 2023
Jagat Veer Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1355 of 2023
Krishana Kumar Kaushik ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1356 of 2023
Pawan Kumar ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1357 of 2023
Bhishma Pal Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1358 of 2023
Rakesh Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
2
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1359 of 2023
Bharat Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1360 of 2023
Chetan Swarup Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Writ Petition (S/S) No.1361 of 2023
Sheeshpal Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ........Respondents
Presence:-
Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Sushil Vashistha, learned Standing Counsel along with
Mr. V.S. Rawat, learned Brief Holder for the State.
Mr. Mohd. Shafy, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Vinay
Bhatt, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 & 3.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
Since a common question of law and fact is
involved in all these writ petitions, hence these are being
taken up together and decided by this common judgment.
2. Petitioners were employed as Sugarcane
Supervisor in Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sitarganj.
According to them, benefit of 7th Pay Commission has not
been given to them from the due date.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed
reliance upon a judgment passed by the Division Bench
of this Court in WPSB No.615 of 2022. Thus, he submits
that present writ petitions may also be decided in terms
of the said judgment.
4. Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 & 3
concedes that the controversy involved in these writ
petitions is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment,
however, he submits that due to precarious financial
condition of the sugar mill, some more time may be given
to respondents to pay the arrears due to petitioners.
5. Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed-off
with a direction to the respondents to pay the arrears,
due to the petitioners, within nine months from today. In
case, arrears are not paid within stipulated time, the
same shall carry interest at the rate of six percent per
annum.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
28.12.2023
AK
