2026:UHC:2512 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/928/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate for the respondents. 2. Petitioner was engaged by Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee (BKTC) on temporary basis for imparting instructions in computer to students of Shree Badrinath Ved Vedang Postgraduate Sanskrit Degree College, Joshimath, District Chamoli in the year 2011. 3. According to him, the Board of BKTC took a decision in 2022 to increase the honorarium of all its teaching/non-teaching employees; however, benefit of said decision is not being extended to the petitioner. 4. The reliefs sought in this writ petition are as follow: “a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the revised increased consolidated salary to the petitioner post completion of 10 years, in terms of the resolution of the board of the respondent Shri Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee, dated 02.08.2014 read with 08.10.2014, whereby, the petitioner is entitled for a consolidated salary of Rs. 32,200 post completion of 10 years of service, w.e.f. 01.04.2022. b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to pay all arrears accrued of increased consolidated salary @ Rs. 32200/- w.e.f. 01.04.2022 till the date, it has actually been paid, and further the respondents be directed to pay the interest at the 2026:UHC:2512 rate of 12% on the on the arrears so accrued.” 5. Learned counsel appearing for BKTC submits that as per the decision, only such employees who are appointed/engaged against sanctioned vacant post alone are eligible for increase of honorarium; as per his instructions, petitioner was not engaged against any sanctioned vacant post, therefore, said benefit was not extended to petitioner. 6. Per contra, Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that after taking work from petitioner for 15 long years, it is not open for the BKTC to contend that there is no sanctioned post. 7. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, learned counsel appearing for BKTC, however, submits that if petitioner makes representation to the competent authority, he shall examine the matter and pass appropriate order, as per law. 8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of by permitting petitioner to make representation. If representation is made within two weeks, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within six weeks thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 08.04.2026 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a9 2d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D3 05B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2026.04.08 19:42:26 +05'30' 2026:UHC:2512