UKHC010103232026 2026:UHC:4945 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Single No.1561 of 2026 17th June, 2026 Rajendra and another ……….Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ……….Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- . Mr. Hem Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, learned S.C. for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking minimum of pay scale along with dearness allowance as being paid to regular Class-IV (Group-D) Employees with the respondent-Department. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioners are working as Daily Wager (Barrier Watchman) with the respondent-Forest Department since 2009 and 2016. He further contends that petitioners are working at Khanpur Range and are being paid ₹12,432/- per month. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that petitioners are entitled to be granted minimum of pay-scale along with dearness allowance. The claim of the petitioners is covered by the Raspal Singh’s case where in the minimum pay-scale was granted to the petitioners of that writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondent-Department has prepared a list for grant of minimum of pay scale to eligible Daily Wager in the Department, but despite long standing and continuous service, the name of the petitioners is not mentioned in the said list. It is feeling aggrieved the petitioners are present before this Court. 1 UKHC010103232026 2026:UHC:4945 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have filed a representation dated 21.01.2026 to respondent no.3-Divisional Forest Officer, Haridwar, and ends of justice would met, if a direction is issued to the respondent no.3-Divisional Forest Officer, Haridwar, to decide representation of the petitioners within a stipulated time. 7. Learned counsel for the State submits that if the petitioners are granted liberty to move fresh representation, a direction could be issued to respondent no.3-Divisional Forest Officer, Haridwar, to decide the same within a stipulated time. 8. In such view of the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of and it is provided that petitioners shall make a representation to respondent no.3-Divisional Forest Officer, Haridwar, within ten days’ from today, giving in detail the grievance of the petitioners, and if such a representation is filed by the petitioners, separately, the respondent no.3- Divisional Forest Officer, Haridwar, shall decide the said representation within a period of six weeks’ from the date of receipt of the representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, and the cases relied upon by the petitioners. 9. It is also provided that the services of the petitioners shall not be disturbed only on the reason that they have approached this Court. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 17.06.2026 SK 2