SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 973043

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
RAHUL PARGAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Office Notes,

reports, orders or proceedings

SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

No.

and Registrar’s

order with Signatures

WPSS/ 1597/ 2025

Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Tarun Prakash Singh Takuli, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Dinesh Bankoti, Brief Holder for the

State.

2. According to petitioner, his father was employed with forest department who died while still in service, on 17.01.2017. His further contention is that he is entitled for compassionate appointment; he made application for such appointment; however, his request was not acceded to. By means of this writ petition, following reliefs have been sought

by petitioner:

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

certiorari quashing the impugned order no. 5587/1-14 Pithoragarh, dated 18, March, 2025 passed by respondent no. 3, by which the respondent no. 3 has informed the petitioner that presently there is no provision for giving appointment to a dependent of daily wager under dying in harness rules. (Annexure no.

1 to the writ petition).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature

of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner under dying in harness rules on regular bas

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top