Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8973 (UTT)

ANAND SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA

WPSS/1930/2026 · 2026-07-28

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010126412026 2026:UHC:6501 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1930/2026 Anand Singh --Petitioner Versus Union Of India --Respondent Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Ms. Tanuja Joshi, Advocate, holding brief of Ms. Shruti Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Ms. Neeti Rana, Standing Counsel for the Union of India. 3. Petitioner was employed with Indian Grain Storage Management and Research Institute (IGMRI). By means of this writ petition, he has sought the following reliefs:- “a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to produce complete original service records, service book, pay bill registers, deduction registers, CGEGIS records, GPF records, ledger entries, calculation sheets and all connected records relating to the petitioner. b. Issue a writ, order or direction directing the respondents to undertake a fresh, transparent and lawful reconciliation of the petitioner's CGEGIS, GPF, pensionary and other service-related dues by passing a detailed reasoned and speaking order. c. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to release and pay the pensionary benefits of the Petitioner, including regular pension, arrears of pension, General Provident Fund (GPF), CGEGIS and all other retiral dues along with applicable interest within a stipulated period as the Petitioner, have completed more than 20 UKHC010126412026 2026:UHC:6501 years of qualifying service and is entitled to pensionary and retiral benefits in accordance with law.” 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents points out that the matter is cognizable by Central Administrative Tribunal and on earlier occasions petitioner has in fact approached Central Administrative Tribunal. Annexure-3 to the writ petition is an order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Circuit Court at Nainital. 5. Since the organization wherein petitioner was employed is notified under Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the Tribunal. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 28.07.2026 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=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4 e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D 095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.07.28 16:42:29 +05'30'