LALIT MOHAN PANT v. UP RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LIMITED
WPSS/1150/2025 · 2026-04-22
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Special Leave Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3548 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3548 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:2952 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPSS 1150/2025
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Yogesh Kumar Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Advocate, for the respondents.
(2) Petitioner was initially appointed as Sub Engineer (Civil) on daily wages in muster roll establishment of U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. on 15.4.1991 and his services were ultimately regularised vide
order dated 7.12.2010, upon creation of permanent post. In this writ petition, petitioner contends that since juniors to him were given regularisation w.e.f. 24.11.1998, therefore, petitioner also deserves to be regularised from the same date when his juniors were regularised. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
“i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner retrospectively from the date when junior to the petitioner, similarly situated employee, were regularized.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction to the respondents to grant the notional seniority and consider the petitioner for promotion from the appropriate date, with all consequential benefits as given to similar situated employees in the department.”
(3)
Learned Counsel for the petitioner relies upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Special Appeal No. 454 of 2018 and submits that the said
2026:UHC:2952
judgment was affirmed by Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) No. 12101 of 2024. Thus it is contended that writ petition filed by the petitioner also deserves to be allowed in terms of the said Division Bench
judgment.
(4)
Learned Counsel for the respondents, however, submits that if petitioner has any claim regarding parity with other Sub Engineers, who were retrospectively regularized, then petitioner is free to approach the competent authority by making a representation.
(5) Writ petition is, accordingly,
disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation to the Managing Director, U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. If he makes representation within two weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within eight weeks thereafter.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
22.4.2026 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=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3ae ab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052 DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.04.22 18:03:08 +05'30'
2026:UHC:2952