Uttarakhand High Court

WPSS/1090/2025 on 1 July, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

             Office Notes,
      Date      reports,
               orders or                  COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
             proceedings
             or directions
                  and
              Registrar's
              order with
              Signatures
S/1                          WPSS No.1090 of 2025
                             Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Ms. Neeti Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Narain Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos.1 to 4. Heard.

Admit.

Learned Chief Standing Counsel takes notices on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 4. Counter affidavit may be filed within four weeks.

Two weeks thereafter, rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed.

List for final hearing on 18.09.2025. Heard on Interim Relief Application (IA) No.1 of 2025.

The petitioner is a Revenue Sub Inspector working in Tehsil Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents are nominating Revenue Sub Inspectors for training, which is to be commenced from today, and only trained Revenue Sub Inspectors, may be promoted as Revenue Inspector. The petitioner's name has not been forwarded on the ground that a trap case is pending against him since 2018. The petitioner seeks directions that he may be permitted to undergo the training which is commencing from today.

By means of the interim relief application, the petitioner seeks directions that he may be permitted to participate provisionally in the training of the Revenue Sub Inspectors 19th Batch.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in fact, in an identical case, based on judgment dated 11.11.2019, passed in WP(MD) No.21879 of 2019, Javed Sadiq Vs. The District Collector, Dindigul District, passed by the the Hon'ble Bench of Madras High Court, Lalit Mohan Goswami was permitted to undergo the training and he has been promoted also. He was also involved in a trap case.

Learned State Counsel was required to get instructions in the matter with regard to Lalit Mohan Goswami.

In the case of Jaber Sadiq (supra), in fact, the Hon'ble Madras High Court has also referred to the principle of law, as laid down in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Chaman Lal Goyal, (1995)2 SCC, 570. In the case of Jaber Sadiq, the Hon'ble Madras High Court based on the law, referred in the judgment, has held that a person may not be denied promotion, in view of pendency of criminal case and disciplinary proceedings. In the instant case, the issue is for nomination for training.

Having considered, as an interim measure, the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner provisionally to undergo the training of Revenue Sub Inspectors, 19th Batch between 01.07.2025 to 30.09.2025. Any effect of the provisional training shall be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition.

Interim relief application stands disposed of accordingly.

Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties, today itself, on payment of usual charges.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 01.07.2025 Sanjay