WPSS/1978/2022
2026 Latest Caselaw 1936 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPSS/1978/2022 on 13 March, 2026

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                                 2026:UHC:1706
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions              COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               WPSS/1978/2022
                               Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Akshay Pradhan, Advocate for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Brij Mohan, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for respondent no. 3.

3. According to the petitioner, he was engaged through outsourcing agency in Uttarakhand Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board for discharging duties as Attendant between 10.12.2017 to 30.12.2018. It is further his case that his engagement was through Prantiya Rakshak Dal and in support of that contention, petitioner has relied upon a document, which is part of record as page no. 24 of the writ petition. Grievance raised by the petitioner is that he has not been paid any remuneration for the services he rendered in Uttarakhand Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board.

4. Petitioner made a representation regarding his unpaid salary, which has been rejected by respondent no. 1, vide order dated 10.06.2022.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is sufficient documentary evidence to prove that petitioner has actually worked between 10.12.2017 to 30.12.2018. In support of that contention, he refers to the documents, which are part of record as 2026:UHC:1706

page no. 26 to 38. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the impugned order, the said documents were not considered at all.

6. Upon perusal of the impugned order, this Court finds substance in the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. Since petitioner's claim for remuneration was rejected, without considering relevant documentary evidence, therefore, the impugned order dated 10.06.2022 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed and respondent no. 2 is directed to re-consider claim of the petitioner for remuneration, as per law, within six weeks.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 13.03.2026 Navin

NAVEEN Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a13

CHANDRA 1bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D6 53D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.03.13 17:53:06 +05'30'