2026:UHC:4219 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS 1961/2024 WPSS 2323/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. M.K. Ray, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Standing Counsel, for the State. Mr. Vinay Bhatt, Advocate, for the respondent no. 2, 3 and 4. (2) Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions is identical, therefore, these are being heard and decided together by this common judgment. However, for brevity, facts of Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1961 of 2024 alone are being considered and discussed here. (3) Petitioners are widows of employees of Kisan Cooperative Sugar Mill Ltd., Gadarpur. According to petitioners, their husband were granted VRS under a scheme floated by State Government, vide Office Memorandum dated 29.12.2016. According to petitioners, their husband were assured that they will be given benefit of pay revision w.e.f. 1.10.2015, but that benefit was not given. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the following relief: “I. to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant benefit to the petitioners as per the Office Memorandum dated 29.12.2016, whereby the Government of Uttarakhand has revised the salary of workers of Kisan Sahkari Sugar Mills Ltd. Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, w.e.f. 01.10.2015 (Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition).” (4) Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that similar issue was decided by coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSS No. 85 of 2018 and the said judgment was affirmed 2026:UHC:4219 by Division Bench. (5) Learned Counsel for the sugar mill, however, submits that Office Memorandum dated 29.12.2016 was stayed by the State Government vide order dated 12.6.2018. (6) Without going into the merits of the case, this Court thinks that ends of justice would be met if the competent authority is asked to examine the matter, as per law. Writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of by permitting the petitioners to make representation to respondent no. 1, highlighting their grievance. If petitioners make such separate representation within two weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken by the competent authority, as per law, within four months thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 27.5.2026 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=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aea b198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052D F6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.05.27 16:54:40 +05'30' 2026:UHC:4219