Writ petition challenged a one-year extension of service granted to an Additional Superintendent of Police by Government Order after his superannuation. The extension had expired in January 2018 and no interim order was operating; the court held the reliefs did not survive and dismissed the petition as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:1792-DB |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPSB No.342 of 2017 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. No representation for the petitioner. 2. Mr. D.S. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. State Government granted extension of service to Mr. T.D. Vela, Additional Superintendent of Police, vide Government Order dated 03.01.2017, the said Government order is on record as Annexure no.3 to the writ petition. A perusal thereof reveals that Mr. T.D. Vela, was going to retire on 31.01.2017, and he was granted extension in service for a period of one year. 4. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- “i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to grant any extension of service of an employee after the date of his superannuation strictly as per provisions of the Service Rules and the Service Rules should not be obtained by Government orders issued from time to time. ii) Quash all such order or orders passed by the respondents from time to time de- hors the provisions of Rules.” |
| 5. | Learned State Counsel points out | that the |
|---|---|---|
| ext end no the 6. not 7. as Acc infr |
ension granted to Mr. T.D. Vela, has co in the month of January, 2018; since interim order passed in this writ refore, the writ petition has become infr In the writ petition counter affidavit been called so far. In the absence of the interim order, claimed by the petitioner do not ordingly, writ petition is dismi uctuous. |
me to an there was petition, uctuous. has also the relief survive. ssed as |
| (Ash NR/ |
ish Naithani, J) (Manoj Kumar 17.03.2025 |
Tiwari, J) |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether extension of service beyond superannuation can be granted by Government Order contrary to Service Rules, and whether such orders should be quashed.
Petitioner (WPSB No.342 of 2017)
State of Uttarakhand
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Ashish Naithani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
