2025:UHC:8912-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No.249 of 2017 Regional Manager (Tehri Region) Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation …… Appellant Vs. Rajpal Singh and others ……Respondents Presence: Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. M.C. Pant, learned counsel for respondent no.1 Mr. Anil Bisht, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3. Coram: Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. (Oral) The present special appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment and order dated 22.03.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.5864 of 2001 (S/S), Sh. Rajpal Singh vs. Regional Logging Manager, U.P. Forest Corporation and others, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner (respondent no.1 herein) was allowed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/respondent no.1 was initially engaged on a daily wage basis as Chowkidar at Selakui Depot No.1. Thereafter, he was appointed on a temporary basis as Scaler vide order dated 06.10.1990 and was directed to join duties at Agra. 2025:UHC:8912-DB 2 3. According to the petitioner, he was not permitted to join his duties at Agra despite the said appointment. He made several representations, but no relief was granted. Consequently, he filed Writ Petition No.5484 of 1994 before the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court seeking the following reliefs: “a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no.1, Regional Logging Manager, U.P. Forest Corporation, Agra to allow the petitioner to work on the post of Scaler in pursuance of the appointment letter dated 06.10.1990; b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent nos.1 and 2 to pay salary to the petitioner on the post of Scaler to the petitioner from 06.10.1990 till date.” 4. After the reorganization of the State of Uttar Pradesh, the writ petition stood transferred to this Court. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned judgment and order dated 22.03.2017, held that although the petitioner was not qualified for the post of Scaler under the regulations framed by the respondent-Corporation, he should nevertheless have been permitted to discharge his duties as Chowkidar on daily wage basis pursuant to his appointment letter dated 07.09.1990. Accordingly, the writ petition was partly allowed and the 3 respondents were directed to permit the petitioner to continue to discharge his duties as Chowkidar. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation has submitted that the petitioner/respondent no.1 was engaged only as a daily wage Chowkidar, and his subsequent appointment as Scaler was irregular and invalid, as he did not possess the requisite educational qualification, namely, High School with Mathematics. 6. He has further submitted that since the appointment as Scaler was made for the Agra Division, the learned Single Judge erred in directing the appellant to permit the petitioner to work as Chowkidar in Uttarakhand. Moreover, it was pointed out that the petitioner did not discharge any duty after 04.04.1991, even in the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.1/petitioner contended that the order passed by the learned Single Judge was just, proper, and based on equitable considerations. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, it is clear that in the writ petition, the petitioner had only sought directions to allow him to work on the post of Scaler pursuant to the appointment letter dated 06.10.1990, and to pay salary for the said post. 9. Admittedly, the petitioner did not possess the minimum educational qualification prescribed for appointment 2025:UHC:8912-DB 4 as Scaler. Consequently, he could not have been legally appointed to the said post. The pleadings in the writ petition further reveal that the petitioner had worked only for about one month as a daily wage Chowkidar. 10. In such circumstances, the directions issued by the learned Single Judge directing the appellant to permit the petitioner to continue to discharge his duties as Chowkidar were beyond the scope of the pleadings and prayers in the writ petition. Furthermore, the petitioner had not worked in the department since April, 1991, and the learned Single Judge could not have granted such relief after an inordinate delay of more than 26 years. 11. In view of the foregoing discussions, this Court finds merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the special appeal succeeds and is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 22.03.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.5864 of 2001 (S/S), Sh. Rajpal Singh vs. Regional Logging Manager, U.P. Forest Corporation and others, is hereby quashed and set aside. 12. No order as to costs. (Alok Mahra, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 08.10.2025 08.10.2025 BS BALWANT SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2eacbf28cdf4 ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE5185F418755 DC00A7A13C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.10.28 11:21:33 +05'30'