Dismissed¶4

Neeraj Saini v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC15 Apr 2026WPSS/1574/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uttarakhand High Court; WPSS 1574/2025; Judge: Manoj Kumar Tiwari; decided 15.4.2026. Petition by short-term arrangement Teachers at Kasturba Gandhi Girls School, District Haridwar, challenging interview letter No. K.G.B.V./215-219/Interview/2025-26 dated 15.09.2025 issued by Respondent No. 5 (interview fixed 22.09.2025, 11:00 AM) and seeking protection from termination or replacement by other contractual employees. Withdrawn on oral prayer of counsel (Akshay Pradhan) citing supervening events; State represented by Brief Holder Dinesh Bankoti. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh, as and when required. No statutes or precedents cited; no merits decided.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file fresh, as and when required. ¶4

SL.
No.

Date

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

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

WPSS 1574/2025
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Akshay Pradhan, Advocate, for
the petitioners.
Mr. Dinesh Bankoti, Brief Holder,
for the State.

(2)
According to petitioners, they are
serving
as
Teacher
on
short
term
arrangement basis in Kasturba Gandhi Girls
School in District Haridwar. By means of
this writ petition, they have sought the
following reliefs:
“I. Issue a writ, order, or direction
in
the
nature
certiorari
quashing
the
impugned
letter
No.
K.G.B.V./215-
219/Interview/2025-26 dated 15.09.2025
issued by Respondent No. 5, whereby the
Petitioners were directed to appear for
interview on 22.09.2025 at 11:00 AM in the
school of Respondent No. 5 (Annexure No.
1).
II. Issue a writ, order, or direction
in the nature mandamus commanding the
Respondents not to terminate the services
of the Petitioners and not to replace them
by any other contractual employee.
III.
Issue
a
writ,
order,
or
direction
in
the
nature
mandamus
commanding the Respondents to allow the
Petitioners to continue discharging their
duties in the same capacity in which they
have been engaged.”

(3)
Learned
Counsel
for
the
petitioners
submits
that
in
view
of
supervening events, petitioners do not want
to press this writ petition, therefore he may
be permitted to withdraw the writ petition

Neeraj Saini v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Saini v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vipin Chandra Kaloni Vs State of Uttarakhand

Manoj Singh Papola Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rajesh Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Nirmal Kumar Pathak Vs State of Uttarakhand

Usha Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sachin Kumar Saxena Vs State of Uttarakhand