2026:UHC:753 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS 519/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Mahesh Bhatt, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, Advocate, for the UPCL. (2) Petitioner was appointed on a Group ‘D’ post of Coolie in the erstwhile Uttar Pradesh Electricity Board. He was put under suspension, on account of pendency of a criminal trial, w.e.f. 18.8.1995. The trial resulted in his conviction, which was upheld right up to Supreme Court. Conviction of the petitioner resulted in passing of termination order against him. Such termination order was passed on 26.8.2015, which was made effective w.e.f. 28.8.2010. In this writ petition, petitioner contends that although he was paid subsistence allowance for the entire period during which he remained under suspension, however such subsistence allowance was paid as per the pay scales applicable in the year 1995 and the benefit of pay revision was not given while granting subsistence allowance to him. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief: “a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondent to pay the arrears of subsistence allowance to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.996 to 28.8.2010 on revised pay Rs. 3050- 4500 which was revised on 1.1.96 and further pay the arrears of subsistence allowance on the basis of revised pay scale in the year 2006 as per VI pay commission.” 2026:UHC:753 (3) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was getting salary in the scale of ₹950-1500 in the year 1995, which was revised to ₹3050-4500 w.e.f. 1.1.1996, which was subsequently revised w.e.f. 1.1.2006, therefore petitioner was entitled to subsistence allowance in accordance with the revised pay scales made effective from 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006 for the period of suspension commencing from 18.8.1995 till termination of service w.e.f. 28.10.2010. (4) Learned Counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. assures that if petitioner makes representation, the same shall be considered as per law. (5) Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation claiming arrears of subsistence allowance. If he makes representation within three weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken by the Superintending Engineer concerned, as per law, within three months thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 10.2.2026 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=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d 462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA 58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.02.10 17:56:06 +05'30' 2026:UHC:753