2025:UHC:5176-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE MR. G. NARENDAR, C.J. HON’BLE MR. ASHISH NAITHANI, J Writ Petition No.547 of 2015 (S/B) Km. Harjit Kaur …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others …Respondents Presence:- Mr. Nishant Krishna Adhikari, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand. JUDGMENT :(per HON’BLE MR. G. NARENDAR, C.J.) Heard Mr. Nishant Krishna Adhikari, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apart from the 5th prayer due to the passage of time the other prayers have been favourably considered by the respondents. In that view of the matter, he would submit that the instant writ petition could be disposed of by issuing a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in terms of the 2013 Rules. 1 2025:UHC:5176-DB 3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents would submit that as on the date of the writ petition, Petitioner was removed from employment. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to the writ petition he was again reinstated. Be that as it may. 4. These are facts, which need to be established by the parties and the proceedings under Article 226 of Constitution of India would not be appropriate forum. Be that as it may. The fact that the petitioner was or is employed under the respondents is not in dispute. The question of termination is something, which can be gone into by the respondents while considering the prayer no.5. 5. The respondents are required to examine the fact as to whether the petitioner is entitled to be considered in terms of Regularization Rules of 2013? In that view of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent no.2 to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services under the Regularization Rules of 2013. The second respondent shall consider the instant writ petition as a 2 2025:UHC:5176-DB representation and dispose of the same within four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner is also at liberty to file such additional statement or material in support of his claim praying for regularization under the Regularization Rules 2013. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost. G. NARENDAR, C.J. ASHISH NAITHANI, J. Dt:19th June, 2025 Arti 3 ARTI SINGH Digitally signed by ARTI SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=487ed955e722ba65aab55409e686c12fb83a19325e8b66890fbee418e7b69c0d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26DC90E00D839E3E8714131F235087D2D87E133C57E7F4A7B2E734BE252 1F982, cn=ARTI SINGH Date: 2025.07.03 17:54:18 +05'30'