Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44 (UTT)

SHARAFAT KHAN v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/49/2026 · 2026-01-07

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:287 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/46/2026 WPMS/48/2026 WPMS/49/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. B.S. Koranga, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Rahul Verma, Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent nos. 1, 3 & 4. 3. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for respondent no. 2. 4. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions, therefore, these petitions are clubbed together and decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity and convenience, facts of WPMS No. 46 of 2026 alone are being considered and discussed. 5. According to the petitioner, he is a construction worker registered with Uttarakhand Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board. He is claiming benefit of a scheme flouted by the aforesaid Board, according to which, financial help is to be provided to construction workers for marriage of their daughters. 6. According to the petitioner, he has made application for benefit of the scheme flouted by the Board and the application was made on 31.12.2024. Since no decision has been taken on the application, therefore, petitioner has approached this Court seeking the 2026:UHC:287 following relief:- “i) To issue a writ order and direction in the nature of Mandamus directing and commanding the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for releasing Rs/- 1,00000/- in favour of the petitioner under the Building and other construction workmen (Regulation of employment and conditions of service) scheme without any technical objection.” 7. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 submits that in the petition, the date of making application, has not been mentioned. He further submits that the application seeking benefit of the scheme has to be made in a prescribed proforma, as provided in Rule 282 of the Uttaranchal Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2005. Rule 282 of the aforesaid Rules is extracted below:- “282. Financial Assistance for marriage. The Building workers having continuous membership for three years shall be eligible to get financial assistance of two thousand rupees for the marriage of their children. A female member of this Fund is also eligible for this assistance for her own marriage. This assistance shall be sanctioned for the marriage of two children of the beneficiary. An application in Form No. XLIV shall be submitted along with such other documents as may be specified by the Board.” 8. Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make application(s) afresh in the prescribed proforma. If petitioners make such application(s) within two weeks from today, the competent authority in the Board shall take decision in the matter, as per law, within six weeks thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 7.1.2026 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131b b4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653 D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.01.07 17:33:06 +05'30'