WPSS/2254/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 6543 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPSS/2254/2025 on 23 December, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                                     2025:UHC:11540
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               WPSS/2254/2025
                               Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Narayan Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 1.

3. Mr. Ishwari Dutt Paliwal, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh / respondent nos. 2 & 3.

4. Petitioner was appointed as Beldar on daily wages in U.P. Irrigation Department in the year 1991. According to him, he was given status of work charged employee in the year 2004 and his services were ultimately regularised as Seenchpal on 31.12.2008. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief:-

"(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reckon the period of work-charged service of the petitioner for purposes of computation of qualifying service for grant of pension as they did in the case of other employees."

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in WPSS No. 399 of 2018, coordinate Bench of this Court decided identical issue and held that services rendered as work charged employee shall be counted towards pensionary / retiral benefits. He submits that Division Bench dismissed the Special No. 376 of 2018 filed by State of Uttar Pradesh against the judgment rendered by coordinate Bench. Thus, he submits that 2025:UHC:11540 issue is covered and the writ petition be decided in terms of the judgment rendered in WPSS No. 399 of 2018.

6. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh concedes that the issue involved here is identical to the one decided in WPSS No. 399 of 2018. He submits that the writ petition can be decided in terms of the said judgment.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is decided in terms of the judgment dated 9.3.2018 rendered in WPSS No. 399 of 2018.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 23.12.2025 Navin NAVEEN

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487 df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15,

CHANDRA postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA 875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.12.24 16:15:58 +05'30'