[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/1941/2023 on 12 December, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
2025:UHC:11121
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
SL. No. Date COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPSS/1699/2023
With
WPSS/1493/2023
WPSS/1702/2023
WPSS/1711/2023
WPSS/1714/2023
WPSS/1940/2023
WPSS/1941/2023
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Ganesh Dutt Kandpal, Deputy Advocate
General for the State.
Mr. Shobhit Joshi, Advocate holding brief of
Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for Uttarakhand
Transport Corporation.
2. Since common questions of law and fact are
involved in these petitions, therefore they are heard
together and are being decided by a common
judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of
Writ Petition No. 1699 of 2023 (SS) alone are being
discussed and considered.
3. Petitioners are serving as Driver on contract in
Uttarakhand Transport Corporation; however, they
are being paid remuneration based on distance
travelled in a day.
4. According to the petitioners, after serving for
nearly one decade as driver, they have earned a right
to be considered for regularisation, which right
however is not being considered by the employer i.e.
Corporation. The mode of payment of honorarium is
also being questioned by petitioners as unfair as
according to them, for discharging duties as regular
2025:UHC:11121
driver are performing, petitioners are entitled to
same remuneration.
5. The reliefs sought in Writ Petition No. 1699 of
2023 (SS) are as follow:
"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondent Uttarakhand Transport
Corporation to treat the petitioners as substantively and regularly
appointed Drivers in the Corporation as the petitioners have been
appointed against the sanctioned posts in the structure and after
following the fair and transparent procedure contemplated under
Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India as well as in terms of
the provisions of the Regulations, 2015.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to
regularize the petitioners on the post of drivers in the Transport
Corporation as per the provisions of the contained in
regularization rules keeping in mind their continuous,
uninterrupted service with the department for reasonable period.
iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondent Uttarakhand Transport
Corporation to pay minimum of the pay scale of the post of Driver
in Transport Corporation to the petitioners inasmuch as
petitioners have been appointed against the sanctioned posts in
the structure and after following the fair and transparent
procedure and after following the fair and transparent procedure
contemplated under Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India as
well as in terms of the provisions of the Regulations 2015 and are
discharging the same duties as is being discharged by the
regularly appointed Driver."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that petitioners were appointed after inviting
applications and after holding selection. He further
submits that there is no intermediary involved and
they were directly appointed by the Corporation
against sanctioned post. Thus according to them,
there is no legal impediment in regularising the
services of the petitioners as sufficient number of
vacancies are available in the Corporation.
7. Mr. Shobhit Joshi, learned counsel holding
brief of Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the
Corporation, however, submits that petitioners were
2025:UHC:11121
engaged on contract, therefore they cannot claim
benefit of regularisation. He further submits that
case of the petitioners is not covered by
Regularisation Rules, as they were appointed after
the cut off date indicated in the advertisement.
8. Be that as it may, after rendering sufficiently
long service as driver, petitioners have earned a right
to be considered for regularisation. It is nobody's
case that there is any complaint or any adverse
material against the petitioners, therefore this Court
thinks that ends of justice would be met if the
competent authority in the Corporation is directed to
examine the claim of petitioners for regularisation
against available vacancies.
9. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of
with liberty to petitioners to make representation for
redressal of their grievances. If they make
representation within three weeks from today,
decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within
five months thereafter.
10. Till decision is taken on their representation,
engagement of the petitioners shall not be disturbed.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
12.12.2025
Mahinder/
MAHINDER SINGH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c,
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F,
cn=MAHINDER SINGH
Date: 2025.12.12 17:30:18 +05'30'
2025:UHC:11121
