2025:UHC:6350-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB 235/2020 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) Mr. Rajavtar Singh, Advocate, i/b Ms. Neetu Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sushil Vashistha, Brief Holder, for the State. Ms. Indu Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent no. 2 and 3. (2) Petitioners have sought the following reliefs in this writ petition: “(a). Issue an appropriate order, Writ or directions in the nature of Certiorari to quash the Impugned common Judgment & Order dated 13-3-2020 (Annexed herewith as Annexure-9) passed by Hon'ble Uttarakhand Public Service Tribunal, Dehradun in Claim Petitions Nos. 130/DB/2019, 133/DB/2019, 135/DB/2019, 136/DB/2019, 137/DB/2019 & 148/DB/2019 to the extent of only directions of allowing reductions in Pay Scales & grade pay of Petitioners, to meet ends of justice to the Petitioners. (b). Summon the entire records of proceedings of Claim Petitions Nos. 130/DB/2019, 133/DB/2019, 135/DB/2019, 136/DB/2019, 137/DB/2019 & 148/DB/2019 pertaining to Petitioners and it is prayed to decide the matter here, in the interest of justice to the Petitioners. (c). Issue an appropriate order, Writ or directions in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to continue to pay salary to Petitioners in accordance with the same pay scales as sanctioned vide the Office Order No. 146 dated 2025:UHC:6350-DB 20-1-2017 (Annexed herewith as Annexure-4) during the pendency of this Writ Petition, in the interest of justice to the Petitioners. (d). Issue an appropriate order, Writ or directions in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to sanction pay scales of promotional posts to Petitioners as per provisions of Uttarakhand Transport Corporation Officers Service Rules, 2009 read with provisions of the Uttarakhand govt. G.O. No. 770 dated 6-11-2013 according to current Pay Commission's recommendations, in the interest of justice to the Petitioners.” (3) From perusal of the relief clause, it is revealed that as many as six different claim petitions were filed by petitioners, which were decided by a common judgment dated 13.3.2020. Challenging the said judgment rendered in all the six claim petitions, this writ petition has been filed. (4) Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection that one common writ petition cannot be filed challenging the judgment rendered in as many as six claim petitions. (5) We find substance in the objection raised by learned State Counsel. Filing a single writ petition challenging the common judgment in relation to six different claim petitions is not maintainable. The appropriate course would have been to file separate writ petitions in respect of each claim petition. On this short point alone, we dismiss the writ petition granting liberty to petitioners to file separate writ petitions. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 21.07.2025 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2025.07.22 16:19:42 +05'30' 2025:UHC:6350-DB