Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14782 (UTT)

KUNDAN SINGH RAWAT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSS/1296/2024 · 2025-12-09

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:10927 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1296/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Vikas Pande, Advocate for the petitioners through video conferencing. 2. Mr. Narayan Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioners are posted as Lecturer in different District Institute of Education and Training within State of Uttarakhand. By means of this writ petition, they have sought the following reliefs:- “(I) Issue a writ or order in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated order dated 13.06.2024 (Annexure no. 1) and advertisement dated 06.07.2024 (Annexure no. 2) to the writ petition. (II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to disturb the petitioners from working as Lecturers in DIETs. (III) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to create separate Cadre of the employees working in the District Institution of Education and Training. (IV) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to make changes in the petitioners portal according to the new classification and not to treat the earlier services rendered in Durgam as Sugam.” 4. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that earlier District Institute of Education and Training were categorised as sugam / durgam depending upon their accessibility, however, pursuant to a decision taken at the highest level, all District Institute of Education Training 2025:UHC:10927 are now categorised as sugam. He submits that the impugned order is in respect of transfer year 2024, which is over long back. He submits that the writ petition has now become infructuous, as the instructions contained in impugned order dated 13.06.2024 are no more applicable to the next transfer year. 5. Mr. Vikas Pande, learned counsel for the petitioners also concedes that the writ petition has become infructuous by efflux of time. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 09.12.2025 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb90 46f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103 819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAA B21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.12.10 10:11:07 +05'30'