Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3163 (UTT)

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND v. SAROP SINGH

SPA/794/2017 · 2025-04-25

Ashish Naithani, Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Civil Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:3068-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS SPA No. 794 of 2017 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. D.S. Bora, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand/ appellants. 2. Mr. Hem Chandra Joshi, Advocate for the respondents. 3. This intra-court Appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 24.03.2017 passed by learned Single Judge in WPSS No. 1192 of 2016. By the said judgment, writ petition filed by the respondents was decided in terms of the judgment rendered in WPSS No. 1721 of 2015 and respondents were directed to pay minimum of the pay scale, along with grade pay from due date and arrears thereof to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the parties are unanimous on the point that large number of petitions, including the writ petition filed by the respondents, involving identical issue, were decided by learned Single Judge and the judgment rendered by learned Single Judge in those petitions were upheld by Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment dated 18.12.2020, rendered in SPA No. 963 of 2017. 5. Learned counsel for the parties further submit that against the judgment rendered by Division Bench in SPA No. 963 of 2017, SLP filed by the State was converted to Civil Appeal Nos. 7181- 7317 of 2021 and the same were dismissed by 2025:UHC:3068-DB Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 15.10.2024. 6. Since it is agreed by learned counsel for the parties that judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge on the identical issue has been affirmed right up to Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore, this Court cannot take a view different from the one, which has been affirmed upto Hon’ble Supreme Court. 7. Thus, there is no scope for interference. The Special Appeal fails and is dismissed. (Ashish Naithani, .J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, .J.) 25.04.2025 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=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487d f006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA8 75643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.04.28 10:37:10 -07'00' 2025:UHC:3068-DB