LALIT MOHAN SINGH RAWAT vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPSS/1400/2026
Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 03rd June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010089962026
Filing Number
WPSS/4680/2026
Filing Date
25-May-2026
Registration No
WPSS/1400/2026
Registration Date
25-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
SERVICE WRIT PETITION ( 1 )
Sub-Category
APPOINTMENT ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
03-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.LALIT MOHAN SINGH RAWAT
Adv. PRIYANKA AGRAWAL,AASHNA PARASHAR,AASHNA PARASHAR, ,AASHNA PARASHAR
-
2.MANISH BISHT
-
3.HARISH KANDARI
-
4.VIMAL SINGH RAWAT
-
5.AJAY KUMAR
-
6.ASHISH DIMRI
-
7.ANUSOYA PRASAD
-
8.DEEPAK DABRAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
-
2.UTTARAKHAND JAL SANTHAN
Adv. PANKAJ CHATURVEDI
-
3.UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LIMITED
Adv. NEERAJ GARG
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar TiwariView PDF
The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the downgrading of three contract employees from Administrative/Personal Officer positions back to Data Entry Operator by Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan, finding the identical issue was already addressed in a prior petition (WP 1383/2026). However, the court granted the petitioners liberty to make a representation before the competent authority, declining to interfere directly in the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
-
25-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPSS/1400/2026
The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the downgrading of three contract employees from Administrative/Personal Officer positions back to Data Entry Operator by Uttarakhand Jal Sansthan, finding the identical issue was already addressed in a prior petition (WP 1383/2026). However, the court granted the petitioners liberty to make a representation before the competent authority, declining to interfere directly in the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts