Uttarakhand High Court
20 November vs Bhupal Singh on 20 November, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:10297
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 398 of 2021
20 November, 2025
Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sitarganj District U.S.Nagar &
another
--Petitioners
Versus
Bhupal Singh
--Respondent
With
Writ Petition Misc. Single No.374 of 2021
Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Sitarganj & another
--Petitioners
Versus
Mahesh Chandra Agnihotri
--Respondent
Writ Petition Misc. Single No.406 of 2021
Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill Sitarganj & another
--Petitioners
Versus
Nathhu Lal
--Respondent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vinay
Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner(s).
Mr. B.D. Pande, learned counsel for the respondent(s).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
By means of WPMS No. 398 of 2021, the
petitioners have challenged the judgment and award dated
12.03.2020, which was published on the notice board on
04.06.2020, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court,
Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in Adjudication Case
No. 243 of 2008 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), whereby the
2025:UHC:10297
claim of the respondent/workman was rejected. However, the
respondent/workman was awarded 50% of the back wages.
2. By means of WPMS No. 374 of 2021, the
petitioners have challenged the judgment and award dated
12.03.2020, which was published on the notice board on
04.06.2020, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court,
Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in Adjudication Case
No. 246 of 2008 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), whereby the
claim of the respondent/workman was rejected. However, the
respondent/workman was awarded 50% of the back wages.
3. By means of WPMS No. 406 of 2021, the
petitioners have challenged the judgment and award dated
12.03.2020, which was published on the notice board on
04.06.2020, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court,
Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in Adjudication Case
No. 244 of 2008 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), whereby the
claim of the respondent/workman was rejected. However, the
respondent/workman was awarded 50% of the back wages.
4. Pursuant to the order dated 11.11.2025, the
respondent No. 2-Secretary, Cane Development and Sugar
Industries, was directed to remain present before this Court
through video conferencing.
5. Mr. P.C. Dumka, Additional Secretary, is present
before this Court through video conferencing. He submits that
the Secretary, Mr. Ranveer Singh Chauhan, is appearing
before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court in another
connected matter; therefore, he (Mr. Dumka) is present before
this Court.
6. The Secretary was called only to ascertain whether
the matter could be settled if the State
Government/petitioner(s) were willing to pay a lump-sum
amount of compensation to the respondent(s)/workman.
7. Mr. P.C. Dumka, Additional Secretary, makes a
2025:UHC:10297
statement on behalf of the State Government that the State
Government, in consultation with the petitioner(s)-Kisan
Sahkari Chini Mill, is ready to pay a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs
towards full and final settlement of the claim of each
respondent/workman.
8. In view of the statement made by the Additional
Secretary, all writ petitions stand disposed of.
9. It is directed that the State Government shall pay
Rs. 5 lakhs towards full and final settlement of the claim of
each respondent/workman within a period of three months
from today.
10. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
20.11.2025
AK
