Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8459 (UTT)

JAWAHIR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSS/514/2026 · 2026-07-22

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010025322026 2026:UHC:6218 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/514/2026 Jawahir --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand & others --Respondents Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Vinay Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Sushil Vashisth, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 3. Mr. Manav Sharma, learned counsel for respondent no.3. 4. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief:- “I. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to make the payments to the petitioner with regard to the retiral benefits (gratuity, leave encashment, arrears of provident fund), along with an interest at the rate of 12% per annum.” 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, except for the amount of gratuity, i.e. Rs.9,92,630/-, all retiral dues of the petitioner have been paid. This fact has been disclosed by the respondents in their counter affidavits. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits, that due to the financial crunch faced by the respondent no.3, the payment may be delayed, but the payment shall be made to the petitioner. 7. In view of the submission of learned counsel for UKHC010025322026 2026:UHC:6218 respondents, the writ petition is finally disposed of, providing that the respondents shall make the payment of the gratuity amount Rs.9,92,630/- as mentioned in the counter affidavit within nine months from today. Needless to say, the payment already made to the petitioner, if any, after filing of the counter affidavit, shall be adjusted. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 22.07.2026 AK