2025:UHC:10972-DB 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Bench No. 275 of 2024 10th December, 2025 Ram Ji Maurya …….……Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Others ……..Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Anup Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Negi, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State/respondent no.1. Mr. S.S. Lingwal, learned counsel for respondent no.2 to 6/University through Video Conferencing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram: Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) By means of the present petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari summoning the records from the G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar; and quashing the impugned orders dated 04.07.2023, 12.07.2023 and 13.07.2023 contained in Annexure Nos.1, 2 & 3 to the writ petition issued by the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3, so far as it relates to the petitioner. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to remove the petitioner from the post of Professor (Agronomy), Directorate of Extension Education pursuant to the impugned orders dated 04.07.2023, 12.07.2023 and 13.07.2023 issued by the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 2025:UHC:10972-DB 2 mandamus commanding the respondents not to deprive the petitioner of any service benefits pursuant to the impugned orders dated 04.07.2023, 12.07.2023 and 13.07.2023. (iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue to serve as Professor (Agronomy), Directorate of Extension Education till he attains the age of 65 years with all consequential benefits. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the controversy has already been concluded by the judgment dated 14.03.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 350 of 2023 Dr. Vinod Kumar vs. Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun and Others, and connected petitions. It is further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid judgment, several similarly situated Teachers have already been reinstated in service and have been extended the benefit of the judgment dated 14.03.2024 passed in the case of Dr. Vinod Kumar (supra). 4. Learned counsel for the University would submit that the judgment dated 14.03.2024 in the case of Dr. Vinod Kumar (Supra) has been challenged by the State before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, he fairly concedes that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the said judgment 2025:UHC:10972-DB 3 and that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has not stayed the effect and operation of the judgment and order dated 14.03.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the State/respondents admits this fact. 6. In view of the fact that similarly situated teachers have already been granted the benefit of the judgment dated 14.03.2024 passed in the case of Dr. Vinod Kumar (Supra), and since it is admitted that the controversy in the present case is covered by the said judgment, and further considering that the challenge preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has not resulted in any stay, no further adjudication is required in the present matter. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment and order dated 14.03.2024 passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 350 of 2023 Dr. Vinod Kumar Vs. Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun and Others, and connected petitions. ( Alok Mah r a, J.) ( Ravin dr a Mait h an i, J.) 1 0.1 2.2 02 5 10 .12 .20 25 Mamta