2026:UHC:2062-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Special Appeal No.54 of 2026 March 24, 2026 Pratap Singh Bisht ----Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others ----Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------ Presence:- Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned counsel for the appellant Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Additional C.S.C. and Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned counsel for Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation/ respondent nos.2, 3, 4 and 5. JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present intra-court appeal is directed against an order of learned Single Judge dated 25.02.2026 in WPSS No.499 of 2026, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant, challenging the suspension order dated 23.08.2023 has been disposed of without interfering with the suspension order, with direction to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within six months. The learned Single Judge has noted the submission made on behalf of the State that it was a case of financial bungling in Lalkuan 1 2026:UHC:2062-DB Depot of Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and the matter is under investigation by SIT. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, in respect of the same incident, two other Class IV employees, namely, Neeraj Gunwant and Girish Joshi, filed WPSS No.952 of 2024 and WPSS No.1361 of 2024, respectively, challenging the suspension orders passed against them and initially interim orders were passed in their favour, staying the suspension orders and, finally the writ petitions were disposed of by order dated 01.12.2025, directing the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings expeditiously while keeping the suspension order in abeyance till the inquiry gets concluded. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner is also identically situated and the order passed in the aforesaid writ petitions was annexed with the writ petition and the submission was also duly pressed before the learned Single Judge but the same has not been considered. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation is not in a position to dispute that the aforesaid two employees are also Class IV employees and that they were placed under suspension in respect of alleged financial bungling at the same Forest 2 2026:UHC:2062-DB Depot. He also does not dispute that in respect of the said inquiries the High Court has stayed the suspension orders till the departmental inquiry is concluded. 6. In view of the said admitted factual position, we are of the opinion that the appellant herein is also entitled to the same protection. Accordingly, we modify the order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.02.2026 and dispose of the instant appeal and the writ petition by providing that the suspension order would remain in abeyance till the conclusion of the disciplinary inquiry. We clarify that the direction given by the learned Single Judge for concluding the disciplinary inquiry within six months shall remain binding on the concerned respondents. 7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 24.03.2026 Rajni 3 RAJINI GUSAIN Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db484 48ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17 d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4 DF4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F53061 6A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2026.03.25 10:21:54 +05'30'