Disposed

Ramesh Chand Gupta v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC1 Dec 2023WPSS/2150/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner Senior Clerk sought release of pending salary. Court directed petitioner to file a fresh representation detailing unpaid periods within 15 days for the respondent to decide via reasoned order within six weeks. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Order disposed directing petitioner to file fresh representation within 15 days for respondent to decide within six weeks.

SL. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
			WPSS No.2150 of 2023 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Ms. Sheetal Selwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Bhupendra Koranga, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court for a direction to the respondent-Nagar Nigam to release the pending salary of the petitioner forthwith. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was a regular employee with the erstwhile Nagar Palika Parishad, Roorkee, which is now Nagar Nigam, Roorkee. Petitioner was retired as a Senior Clerk from the department on 30.06.2023. 6. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that for no reasons, the salary of the petitioner w.e.f. February, 2022 to October, 2022 and April, 2023 to June, 2023 had not been paid to the petitioner. But, subsequently, he was paid salary for the month of November, 2022 till March, 2023. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has moved representation to the respondent no.2, annexure-1 to the writ petition with a request to release the salary of the petitioner, which is pending with it. She further made an innocuous prayer that

SL.
No

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions and
Registrar’s order
with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

WPSS No.2150 of 2023
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Ms. Sheetal Selwal, learned counsel for
the petitioner.
2.
Mr. Bhupendra Koranga, learned Brief
Holder for the State.
3.
Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel for
respondent no.2.
3.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4.
By means of this writ petition, petitioner
has sought the indulgence of this Court for a
direction to the respondent-Nagar Nigam to
release the pending salary of the petitioner
forthwith.
5.
It is the case of the petitioner that
petitioner was a regular employee with the
erstwhile Nagar Palika Parishad, Roorkee, which
is now Nagar Nigam, Roorkee. Petitioner was
retired as a Senior Clerk from the department
on 30.06.2023.
6.
It is the contention of learned counsel for
the petitioner that for no reasons, the salary of
the petitioner w.e.f. February, 2022 to October,
2022 and April, 2023 to June, 2023 had not
been paid to the petitioner. But, subsequently,
he was paid salary for the month of November,
2022 till March, 2023.
7.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner has moved representation to the
respondent
no.2,
annexure-1
to
the
writ
petition with a request to release the salary of
the petitioner, which is pending with it. She
further
made
an
innocuous
prayer
that

petitioner may be permitted to file a fresh
representation to the respondent no.2 and respondent no.2 may be directed to decide the same within stipulated time. 8. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 has
no objection to this proposition made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed- off finally with a direction to the petitioner to move a fresh representation to the respondent no.2 detailing therein the period for which the salary of the petitioner was not paid, within
fifteen days’ from the date of production of certified copy of this order and the respondent no.2 shall decide the same, by a reasoned and speaking order, as expeditiously, as possible, but not later than six weeks therefrom. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 01.12.2023 AK

petitioner may be permitted to file a fresh

representation to the respondent no.2 and
respondent no.2 may be directed to decide the
same within stipulated time.
8.
Learned counsel for respondent no.2 has

no objection to this proposition made by
learned counsel for the petitioner.
9.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed-
off finally with a direction to the petitioner to
move a fresh representation to the respondent
no.2 detailing therein the period for which the
salary of the petitioner was not paid, within

fifteen days’ from the date of production of
certified copy of this order and the respondent
no.2 shall decide the same, by a reasoned and
speaking order, as expeditiously, as possible,
but not later than six weeks therefrom.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
01.12.2023
AK

Ramesh Chand Gupta v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chand Gupta v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chaman Das Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohan Chandra Bhatt Vs Union of India

Mukesh Chandra Upreti Vs Uttarakhand State Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

Raghunandan Mishra Vs State of Uttarakhand

Jatin Rawat Vs State of Uttarakhand

Smt. Uma Khati Vs State of Uttarakhand through Secretary