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

2026 Supreme(Online)(UK) 1623

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
RAMESH CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
WPSS 710 / 2026



Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings S N L o . .

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS and Registrar’s order with Signatures WPSS 710/ 2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Standing Counsel, for the State.

Mr. Lalit Samant, Advocate, for the respondent no. 2.

(2) Petitioners were employees of Uttarakhand Cooperative Federation, who retired on various dates. According to them, they have not been paid certain monetary benefits between 2005 to 2009. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs:

“i. A Writ Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to add the service of petitioners from 01.01.2005 to 31.12.2009 in their entire service period and pay service benefits in the form of Arrears of Pay-Increment, Gratuity-Increment, A.C.P. benefits, Earned-Leave benefits, Provident Fund benefits and other service benefits as a consequence to the final Judgment and Order dated 13.07.2015 & 10.04.2018 passed in W.P. (S/S) No. 3776/2004 & W.P. (S/S) No. 4970/2004 against which Special Appeal and S.L.P. in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, has been dismissed finally vide Order dated 06.01.2025 (Annexure No. 3.).

ii. A Writ Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to decide the Representation of the petitioners (Annexure No. 4).

iii. A Writ Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no.

2 to pay interest @ 18% on all payments.”

(3) Mr. Lalit Samant, learned Counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Cooperative Federation, submits that some of the petitioners have made representation, which are collectively enclosed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, however representations are sketchy and moreover, many of the petitioners have not made any representation.

(4) Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of granting liberty to petitioners to make separate fresh representation to the competent authority. If they make such representation within two weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within four months thereafter.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

11.3.2026 Pr P K R U A M B A O R DH DDU20s7De.3F TiN a 5r g 3, ti :4paeC Atc l: o a 9 2N =R 2 l s1 0I u0 t yN=am K 5 s, l3 6 HC io 7b g a . oA= B0 0e n d 3E NH r8 e =.5e2D 1 IdG =30a 2 ,b ,D H02 1c y 6C n2 C a3 P 1=: O90 5 R P 5 7 UA R a1 :E R 0 B A f,8 T 2 O s9 BD t O + D 1 O=80 FH UDCa 5 U TAH K 9 '3 T 6 U 5 0KA M 'U A RE9 M A 1 R76 R 4KAB3 H K R9aH A 4f8A N0 N DE2F D1, Dc, 5o08 u60 = 6 H2A IfG C6He aC 1 O A4U B R 56T 81 aOf03F 5a 2eDFb619C8Ad5486C256

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 Back to top