Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9160 (UTT)

KUNWAR SINGH ADHIKARI v. UNION OF INDIA

WPSS/1979/2026 · 2026-07-31

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010130652026 2026:UHC:6682 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Single No.1979 of 2026 31st July, 2026 Kunwar Singh Adhikari ………….Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ………….Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Prince Chauhan, Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Suniti Bhatt, learned counsel for the Union of India. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent-Authorities to grant the benefit of Fixed Medical Allowance (FMA) w.e.f., 23.10.1998 i.e., the date of his retirement from the Indo- Tibetan Border Police Force. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was serving in the respondent- ITBP as Constable (Cook). He was appointed as such in the year 1967 and after rendering 30 years service petitioner retired on 23.10.1998. Petitioner was granted FMA by the respondent-Authorities vide sanction order dated 12.07.2025, annexure no.3 to the writ petition, and the same was given w.e.f., 23.09.2024. The petitioner is before this Court for grant of FMA from the date of his retirement dated 23.10.1998. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has given a representation to the respondent-Authority on 17.07.2026, annexure no.5 to the writ petition, which is still pending disposal before the respondent-Authorities and if a direction is issued to respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner in a time bound manner, ends of justice would be 1 UKHC010130652026 2026:UHC:6682 met. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection if such a direction is issued to respondent no.2 for disposal of the said application/representation filed by the petitioner, in a time bound manner. 5. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is a senior citizen and is presently aged about 78 years, the writ petition stands disposed of finally. Respondent no.2 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 17.07.2026, annexure no.5 to the writ petition, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 31.07.2026 SK 2 SHUBHAM KAPRUWAN Digitally signed by SHUBHAM KAPRUWAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=a29a2f80b93835a432d093afc472d9355959ee0ff878380c645 e17d546a24821, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=B505B049BA2FDAC35E7AE325DEE1505D6C35AF3D29 0C229CDC609D61801E1E4F, cn=SHUBHAM KAPRUWAN Date: 2026.07.31 18:35:00 +05'30'