Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:5279-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA
WRIT PETITION (S/B) No. 247 OF 2025
23rd June, 2025
Birendra Datt Saklani
…… Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and and Others
…… Respondents
Presence:- Mr. Pooran Singh Rawat and Mr. M.C. Upadhayay, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.C. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar)
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs:-
“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 i.e. Divisional Forest Officer Soil Conservation Department, Kalsi Division, Dehradun to re issue clarification letter to the respondent no. 4 i.e. Additional Director Directorate Pension and Entitlement and further directing to respondent no. 2 & 4 to re-fix / revise the pension along with arrears of the pension of the petitioner according to Letter No. 2358 dated
10.03.2022. (ANNEXURE NO. 4 to this writ petition) ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the Respondent no. 2 & 4 to decide the representation dated 28.12.2023 made by petitioner in the light of Letter No. 2358 dated 10.03.2022 as earliest as possible.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the reliefs, sought for, the instant writ petition 1
2025:UHC:5279-DB could be disposed of by directing the respondent no. 2 to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 28.12.2023 (Annexure No. 11).
4. The issue involves revision and release of pensionary benefits.
5. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the same necessitates expeditious consideration. The pendency of the representation for nearly two years is wholly unjustified.
6. In that view of the matter, we direct the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 28.12.2023 (Annexure No. 11), as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
7. Petition stands ordered accordingly.
8. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________
G. NARENDAR, C.J.
____________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 23rd June, 2025 Ujjwal 2
2025:UHC:5279-DB
3