Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10238 (UTT)

AARTI BHARDWAJ v. GURUKULA KANGRI HARIDWAR

WPSB/547/2026 · 2026-08-20

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010148442026 2026:UHC:7508-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY 20th August, 2026 WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 547 of 2026 Smt. Aarti Bhardwaj ------Petitioner Versus Gurukula Kangri, Haridwar & Others ----Respondents Presence:- Ms. Abhilasha Tomar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2 through V.C. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.) 1. The petitioner was recommended for appointment on the post of Associate Professor in Microbiology in Kanya Gurukul Campus, Haridwar of Gurukula Kangri (deemed University), Haridwar by a Selection Committee on 11.11.2020. The recommendation was subject to verification of the certificates furnished by the candidates at the time of selection. It appears that, thereafter, a communication dated 30.06.2021, was sent by the Registrar of the University to the petitioner requiring the petitioner to furnish various information in respect of her alleged experience in different institutions. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she had furnished all the required information, but even after passage of considerable time, the respondents - University has not issued any appointment letter and, consequently, the present writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue appointment letter in favor of the petitioner, and for a further direction to decide the representation of the petitioner submitted in 1 UKHC010148442026 2026:UHC:7508-DB response to the respondents’ letter dated 30.06.2021. 3. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents - University states that the University would decide the representation of the petitioner submitted in response to the respondents’ letter dated 30.06.2021. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents - University to decide the representation of the petitioner submitted by her in response to the letter dated 30.06.2021, or any fresh representation made by the petitioner along with copy of the instant order, within a period of six weeks from the date of making of the representation and communication of the instant order. 5. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 20.08.2026 PP/ 2