Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1203 (UTT)

DOIWALA SUGAR COMPANY LTD v. MOHAN BHATT

WPSB/218/2016 · 2025-08-12

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Subhash Upadhyay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:7054-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI AND HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (S/B) No.218 of 2016 12th August, 2025 Doiwala Sugar Company Ltd. -----Petitioner Versus Mohan Bhatt & Ors. ------Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Anupriya Kukreti, Advocate holding brief of Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 10 Mr. T.A. Khan, Senior Advocate for respondent no.11 Mr. I.D. Paliwal, Standing Counsel for State of U.P./respondent no.12 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari) 1. Doiwala Sugar Company Limited has challenged judgment dated 06.10.2015 rendered by Uttarakhand Public Service Tribunal in Claim Petition No.43/DB/2014. By the said judgment, claim petition filed by respondent nos.1 to 10 was allowed and the employer was directed to fix the pay of respondent nos.1 to 10 notionally in time scale/selection grade with effect from the date it became due as per Promotion Policy of 1996, if the said respondents are found eligible for such benefit. Uttar Pradesh State Sugar 1 2025:UHC:7054-DB Corporation Limited and Uttarakhand Sugar Corporation Limited were also directed to extend all benefits to respondent nos.1 to 10 towards their retiral benefits, if it accrues to them as per the Policy. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Promotion Policy of 1996, framed by U.P. State Sugar Corporation Limited, was never implemented in sugar mills of State of U.P. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 to 10 has drawn our attention to internal page 8 of the impugned judgment, where after referring to the relevant extract of the Promotion Policy, formulated by Uttarakhand Sugars in 2012, learned Tribunal returned a finding that the Promotion Policy formulated by Competent Authority in State of U.P. was adopted by Competent Authority in State of Uttarakhand. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that in view of law declared by Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Uttarakhand and another vs. Umakant Joshi, reported in (2012) 11 SCC 164 private respondents could not have staked claim for monetary benefits which allegedly accrued to them 2 2025:UHC:7054-DB before State re-organization and learned Tribunal erred in entertaining and allowing the claim petition filed by respondent nos.1 to 10. 5. This Court is not impressed by the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Learned Tribunal has considered the Promotion Policy formulated by Uttarakhand Sugars in 2012 for arriving at the conclusion that Promotion Policy of 1996 was made applicable. Thus, the first contention is devoid of any merit. 7. As regards the second contention that the private respondents could not have staked claim for monetary benefits, which accrued to them before State re-organization, learned Tribunal has held in the impugned order that private respondents shall not be entitled to arrears of monetary benefits prior to 10.01.2013. 8. Upon perusal of impugned judgment, we are of the considered opinion that any interference in the matter would not be warranted. Learned Tribunal has merely provided that if private respondents are otherwise found eligible for time scale/selection grade as per Policy applicable in 1996, then they shall be 3 2025:UHC:7054-DB considered for such benefit. Thus, we refuse to interfere in the matter. 9. Accordingly, writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 12.08.2025 12.08.2025 Rajni 4 RAJINI GUSAIN Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48 448ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f 17d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B 4DF4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530 616A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2025.08.13 18:05:25 +05'30'