High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 UK CK 6966

Manoj Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors.

Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital · Decided on 28 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pankaj Purohit, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition Service Single No. 2501 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 373 words

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization and other ancillary reliefs.

2.

The petitioner contends that he is working with the respondent no.3 as Computer Operator since 2006. He fulfills the qualification for the post of Computer Operator in Government Combined Hospital, Srinagar, Pauri Garhwal.

3.

It is also contended by the petitioner that he was engaged as a contractual Computer Operator after following due process of law and advertisement was also issued on 01.12.2006 to supply the vacancies on the sanctioned post of the Computer Operator.

4.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the case of petitioner is covered under the Daily Wages, Work Charge, Contract, Fixed Salary, Part Time and Adhoc Basis Regularization Rules, 2013 (as amended up to date). For the same, the petitioner is seeking regularization against the post of Computer Operator, on which he has been working since 2006.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has moved a representation dated 05.06.2026 to respondent no.3, which was forwarded by respondent no.3 to respondent no.2 on 20.09.2026. But till date, no decision has been taken on the aforesaid representation of the petitioner.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that if a direction is issued to the respondent no. 2 to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner in a time bound manner, the ends of justice would be met.

7.

Learned State Counsel has no objection if such an order is passed by this Court.

8.

Accordingly, the writ petition is finally disposed of, directing the respondent no.2-Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Dehradun, Uttarakhand to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 05.06.2026 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) which was forwarded to him by the respondent no.3 on 20.09.2026, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, by a reasoned and speaking order, keeping in view a long standing service as a contractual Computer Operator of the petitioner and that too against the sanctioned post after due process of law.