2025:UHC:11121 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS/ 1 6 9 9 / 2 0 2 3 W it h W PSS/ 1 4 9 3 / 2 0 2 3 W PSS/ 1 7 0 2 / 2 0 2 3 W PSS/ 1 7 1 1 / 2 0 2 3 W PSS/ 1 7 1 4 / 2 0 2 3 W PSS/ 1 9 4 0 / 2 0 2 3 W PSS/ 1 9 4 1 / 2 0 2 3 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ganesh Dutt Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Mr. Shobhit Joshi, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for Uttarakhand Transport Corporation. 2. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these petitions, therefore they are heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition No. 1699 of 2023 (SS) alone are being discussed and considered. 3. Petitioners are serving as Driver on contract in Uttarakhand Transport Corporation; however, they are being paid remuneration based on distance travelled in a day. 4. According to the petitioners, after serving for nearly one decade as driver, they have earned a right to be considered for regularisation, which right however is not being considered by the employer i.e. Corporation. The mode of payment of honorarium is also being questioned by petitioners as unfair as according to them, for discharging duties as regular 2025:UHC:11121 driver are performing, petitioners are entitled to same remuneration. 5. The reliefs sought in Writ Petition No. 1699 of 2023 (SS) are as follow: “i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Uttarakhand Transport Corporation to treat the petitioners as substantively and regularly appointed Drivers in the Corporation as the petitioners have been appointed against the sanctioned posts in the structure and after following the fair and transparent procedure contemplated under Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India as well as in terms of the provisions of the Regulations, 2015. ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to regularize the petitioners on the post of drivers in the Transport Corporation as per the provisions of the contained in regularization rules keeping in mind their continuous, uninterrupted service with the department for reasonable period. iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Uttarakhand Transport Corporation to pay minimum of the pay scale of the post of Driver in Transport Corporation to the petitioners inasmuch as petitioners have been appointed against the sanctioned posts in the structure and after following the fair and transparent procedure and after following the fair and transparent procedure contemplated under Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India as well as in terms of the provisions of the Regulations 2015 and are discharging the same duties as is being discharged by the regularly appointed Driver.” 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were appointed after inviting applications and after holding selection. He further submits that there is no intermediary involved and they were directly appointed by the Corporation against sanctioned post. Thus according to them, there is no legal impediment in regularising the services of the petitioners as sufficient number of vacancies are available in the Corporation. 7. Mr. Shobhit Joshi, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the Corporation, however, submits that petitioners were 2025:UHC:11121 engaged on contract, therefore they cannot claim benefit of regularisation. He further submits that case of the petitioners is not covered by Regularisation Rules, as they were appointed after the cut off date indicated in the advertisement. 8. Be that as it may, after rendering sufficiently long service as driver, petitioners have earned a right to be considered for regularisation. It is nobody’s case that there is any complaint or any adverse material against the petitioners, therefore this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met if the competent authority in the Corporation is directed to examine the claim of petitioners for regularisation against available vacancies. 9. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to petitioners to make representation for redressal of their grievances. If they make representation within three weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within five months thereafter. 10. Till decision is taken on their representation, engagement of the petitioners shall not be disturbed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 12.12.2025 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.12.12 17:30:18 +05'30' 2025:UHC:11121