2025:UHC:7025-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/322/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. 1. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. While serving as Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, petitioner was removed from service by Secretary, Finance, Government of Uttarakhand vide order dated 13.11.2020. He challenged the order of removal by filing WPSB No. 216 of 2023, which was dismissed by coordinate Bench vide order dated 25.05.2023 with liberty reserved to petitioner to approach Uttarakhand Public Service Tribunal. Petitioner thereafter approached Uttarakhand Public Service Tribunal by filing Claim Petition No. 107/NB/DB/2023. His claim petition has been dismissed on the ground of delay of about five months in filing the claim petition, vide order dated 04.10.2024. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time when the order of removal was passed against the petitioner, COVID-19 pandemic was at its peak and Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed in Suo Moto Writ Petition No. 03 of 2020 that the period between 2025:UHC:7025-DB 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall be excluded, while reckoning period of limitation for filing a petition or appeal. He submits that learned Tribunal took a hyper-technical and pedantic approach which has resulted in miscarriage of justice. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner placed reliance upon final order dated 23.05.2025 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSB No. 163 of 2025 in which in similar facts and circumstances, delay of 195 days in filing claim petition was condoned and the matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for decision on merits. 7. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that present writ petition deserves to be decided in terms of the said judgment. 8. Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State does not dispute the submission made by petitioner’s counsel and he concedes that facts involved in that case are identical to the fact of this case. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is decided in terms of the order dated 23.05.2025 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSB No.163 of 2025. Delay of 132 days in filing the claim petition is thus liable to be ignored. The matter is remitted back to learned Tribunal, which shall consider the claim petition on merits, as per law. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 11.08.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.08.11 06:19:07 -07'00' 2025:UHC:7025-DB