Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5661 (UTT)

SACHIN SAXENA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSB/269/2026 · 2026-05-11

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:3579-DB I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 1 1 TH MAY, 2 0 2 6 W RI T PETI TI ON ( S/ B) No. 2 69 OF 2 0 2 6 Sachin Saxena. …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and another. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner. : Ms. Sangeeta Adhikari Patni, learned counsel. Counsel for the respondents. : Mr. B.P.S. Mer, learned Standing Counsel with Mr. S.M.S. Mehta, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. JUDGMENT : (per Sh r i Man oj Ku m ar Gu p t a, C.J.) 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayers : - “i) Issue a writ, order or direction directing the Respondents to consider the Petitioner for promotion to the post of HOD (Mechanical) without being adversely affected by the impugned ACR for 2022-23, subject to the final outcome of Claim Petition No. 142/ 2025 pending before the Hon'ble Public Service Tribunal. OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE To direct the Respondents to keep one post of HOD (Mechanical) vacant or to keep the result of the DPC in respect of the Petitioner in a sealed cover, subject to the final outcome of Claim Petition No. 142/ 2025. ii) Issue a writ, order or direction that any promotion made pursuant to the said DPC shall be subject to the outcome of the present writ petition as well as Claim Petition No. 142/ 2025.” 1 2026:UHC:3579-DB 2. A perusal of the averments made in the Writ Petition reveals that DPC was held in April, 2026 and, consequently, the main relief cannot be granted at this stage. The alternative prayer, for keeping the result in the sealed cover, subject to final outcome of the Claim Petition, can also not be granted, as the petitioner was not called in the DPC, nor was considered in view of the adverse entries against him. 3. Consequently, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, this will not adversely affect the petitioner, in case his Claim Petition is allowed, and, in which event, the petitioner would be entitled to pray for appropriate reliefs, as may be admissible to him under law. 4. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 11th May, 2026 Rahul 2 RAHUL PRAJAPATI Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed 3e66e61bf4c848741983ed8c39e4145cf1d ab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF 8A192FCAD15C390A1AAD7B39857D2540 AE4C28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2026.05.13 11:35:08 +05'30'