WPSB/49/2026
2026 Latest Caselaw 678 UK

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 678 UK
Judgement Date : 5 February, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

WPSB/49/2026 on 5 February, 2026

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                 COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             and Registrar's
                order with
               Signatures
                               WPSB No.49 of 2026

                               Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Mr. Rahul Verma (through V.C.) and Mr. Ajay Joshi, learned counsels for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Vipul Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents through video conferencing.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. The challenge in this petition is to the advertisement dated 19.12.2025 issued by the respondent no.2 to the extent it invites online application for the post of 'Institute Engineer' in IIT Roorkee.

5. The second relief is that respondents should not terminate the services of the petitioner till the completion of deputation period.

6. Today, Mr. Vipul Sharma, counsel for the respondents made a statement before the Court that the advertisement impugned in the writ petition does not pertain to the stream of the petitioner. Rather, it pertains to a regular post on which one Mr. Ajay Sharma was working who retired on 25.06.2025.

7. The next submission of the counsel for the respondents is that the services of the petitioner have been extended with effect from 24.09.2025 to 23.09.2026. The respondents' counsel also pointed out that Clause 6 of the terms and condition and the offer of appointment dated 04.09.2024, the said Clause, inter alia, states "during the tenure, the services are liable of termination with three months notice in writing would be given by either side". The counsel for the respondents makes a submission that in the eventuality, the respondent-Institute wishes to terminate the services of the petitioner there shall be adherence to the said Clause.

8. In view of the above, the apprehension and the anxiety as being shown by the petitioner does not exist.

9. In view of the above, the writ petition and the Urgency Application (IA No.2 of 2026) are disposed of accordingly.

[

(Siddhartha Sah, J.) Vacation Judge 05.02.2026

Ravi