2026:UHC:3192 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS 1117/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.C. Joshi, Brief Holder, for the State. Mr. Lalit Miglani, Advocate, for the Nagar Nigam. (2) According to petitioner, based on his academic qualifications, he was engaged as Urban Infrastructure Expert in City Level Technical Cell in District Haridwar by the Directorate of Urban Development and he was assigned to look after the work under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna (Urban) in Nagar Nigam, Roorkee, Piran Kaliyar and Landhora. It is not in dispute that petitioner possesses B.Tech, MBA and Law Degree. After serving for the last seven years in the aforesaid capacity, petitioner was disengaged vide order dated 17.3.2026, passed by Director, Urban Development. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court. (3) It is contended that petitioner’s engagement was discontinued because he made complaint against the distribution of money to persons, who were not eligible for benefit under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna. It is thus contended that the impugned order is motivated and has been passed in colourable exercise of power. (4) Per contra, learned State Counsel and learned Counsel appearing for Nagar Nigam submit that work and performance of petitioner was far from satisfactory; he was not abiding by instructions issued by his superior authorities; he was not regular in attending to his duties and he was not uploading information in time in the website of 2026:UHC:3192 Central Government. It is further contended on behalf of respondents that because of lackadaisical attitude of petitioner, ranking of Nagar Nigam, Roorkee came down from Category A to Category D; as against target of 100 residential units, only 2 residential units were constructed in Nagar Nigam, Roorkee. (5) This Court is not inclined to go into the rival submission made on behalf of parties and this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met if petitioner is permitted to approach the competent authority by making representation. (6) Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make representation to Secretary, Urban Development for his re-engagement. If he makes such representation within two weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken by the Secretary concerned, as per law, within ten weeks thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 28.4.2026 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=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C919 57BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.04.28 20:13:51 +05'30' 2026:UHC:3192