VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Uttarakhand High Court 2026 › High Court of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand State Warehousing Corporation v. Pramod Kumar

DISPOSED
Court
High Court of Uttarakhand
Decided
8 May 2026
Bench
Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay
Case no.
SPA 94/2024

Follow Uttarakhand High CourtFollow Manoj Kumar GuptaFollow Subhash Upadhyay

Judgment

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL

HON'BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON'BLE SHRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY

0 8 TH MAY, 2 0 2 6

SPECI AL APPEAL No. 9 4 OF 20 2 4

Uttarakhand State Warehousing Corporation.

…Appellant Versus

Pramod Kumar and others.

…Respondents

Counsel for the appellant.

: Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel.

Counsel for respondent nos. 1 &

¶2: Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel.

JUDGMENT : (per Sh r i Man oj Ku m ar Gu p t a, C.J.)

1.

The instant intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 14.03.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S/ S) No. 3495/ 2018, whereby the Writ Petition filed by non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 herein has been disposed of, quashing the order impugned in the Writ Petition dated

28.06.2017, by which the appellant has rejected the request of non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 for regularization of their services, on the ground that the Regularization Rules of 2016 had been stayed by this Court, by order dated 24.01.2017 passed in Writ Petition (S/ S) No. 154/ 2017, and consequently their services cannot be regularized, with further direction to the appellant to regularize the services of non-appellant nos.1 & 2.

2.

The short submission of learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation is that, although the stay order dated

24.01.2017 passed in the Writ Petition has merged into final order dated 22.02.2024, the effect of which is to amend the Regularization Rules to a limited extent, but in such an event, the Corporation should have been given liberty to consider the case of non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 for regularization. He submits that there was break in service of non-appellant no. 1 and non-appellant no. 2, does not fulfill the criteria laid down under the Regularization Rules. As the Regularization Rules remained stayed, therefore, the appellant-Corporation did not get any opportunity to place these facts before the writ Court. It is submitted that the appellant-Corporation has no objection in considering the case of non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 for regularization, as per the Regularization Rules, 2013, as amended on 05.12.2025, on basis of directions issued by this Court by judgment dated 22.02.2024 passed in Writ Petition (S/ B) No. 616/ 2018 and connected matters.

3.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2 very fairly states that he has no objection in case the order of learned Single Judge is modified to the aforesaid extent. He submits that non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 be given

liberty to file fresh representation, and state complete facts before the appellant-Corporation. He also prays that a specified time frame be fixed for deciding the plea of regularization of services of non-appellant nos. 1 & 2.

4.

Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, the instant intra-court appeal is disposed of as follows : -

(a) The order of learned Single Judge is set-aside to the extent it directs the appellant-Corporation to regularize the services of non-appellant nos. 1 & 2.

(b) Non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 are granted liberty to file fresh representations, along with supporting evidence, within four weeks, along with attested copy of the instant order before the appellant-Corporation, seeking regularization of their services.

(c) The appellant-Corporation will pass a speaking order on the said representations within a further period of four weeks.

5.

Dependent upon the outcome of the representations filed by non-appellant nos. 1 & 2, for regularization of their services, non-appellant nos. 1 & 2 would be entitled to consequential benefits, if any.

A A

¶6All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.

______________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.

___________________

SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

thDt: 08 May, 2026 Rahula Digital y signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI D ou N = : H c= IG IN H ,

C o= O H U I R G T H O C F O U U T RT A O RA F K U H T A A N R D A , KHAND,

2.5.4.20=a 4fa3be 6 91397 58b14516ed3e6RAHUL e61bf4c848741983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, postalCode=2630 1, st=UT ARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B5 C 3063D34AC45BF8A19 2FCAD15C390A1A D7B39857D2540AE4C28A4PRAJAPATI 898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2026.05.08 14:42:08 +05'30'

Source: High Court of Uttarakhand, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.