20 November vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 2679 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

20 November vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 20 November, 2024

Author: Rakesh Thapliyal

Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal

                                                    2024:UHC:8607



HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     Writ Petition Service Single No. 2109 of 2023
                      20 November, 2024


Umed Singh Barthwal                              --Petitioner
                            Versus

State Of Uttarakhand and others
                                                 --Respondents
                        with
   Writ Petition Service Single No. 2111 of 2023


Trilochan Prasad Nautiyal                        --Petitioner
                        Versus
State Of Uttarakhand and others
                                                 --Respondents
                        with
   Writ Petition Service Single No. 2112 of 2023


Birendra Singh Panwar                           --Petitioner
                            Versus

State Of Uttarakhand and others
                                                 --Respondents
                        with
   Writ Petition Service Single No. 2114 of 2023


Anusuya Prasad Mamgain                           --Petitioner
                     Versus
State Of Uttarakhand and others
                                              --Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------
Present:-
Mr. Anil K. Bisht,, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Addl. C. S. C. for the State.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

In all these bunch of petitions common question of

2024:UHC:8607 facts and law are involved. For deciding the issue, relief as sought in WPSS No. 2109 of 2023 is being reproduced as under:-

"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents/ department to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 6,33,596/- towards gratuity, by taking into consideration the services rendered by him on ad-hoc basis, as he is entitled for the gratuity amount of Rs. 20,00,000//- whereas the amount of Rs. 13,66,404/- was paid to him, by saying that the ad-hoc period of service would not be counted for gratuity.

2. Mr. Anil K. Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue, as raised, in this petition is squarely covered by the judgment dated 28.02.2024 passed in bunch of petitions and the leading one is Special Appeal No. 223 of 2022, State of Uttarakhand and others vs. Dinesh Singh as well as the ratio laid down by the Division Bench in another Special Appeal No. 422 of 2021 decided on 24.04.2024.

3. Mr. R.S. Bisht, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State fairly submits that the issue, as raised, in these petitions are covered by the judgment passed by the Division Bench in Special Appeal No. 223 of 2022.

4. In view of the submissions as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, all these writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Division Bench in bunch of appeals, the leading one is Special Appeal No. 223 of 2022.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) Parul

2024:UHC:8607