DINESH PRASAD THAPLIYAL vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPSS/1526/2026
Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 10th June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010100542026
Filing Number
WPSS/5251/2026
Filing Date
08-06-2026
Registration No
WPSS/1526/2026
Registration Date
08-06-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
SERVICE WRIT PETITION ( 1 )
Sub-Category
PENSION MATTER ( 16 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
10th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DINESH PRASAD THAPLIYAL
Adv. DEVANG DOBHAL
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
DIRECTOR
Adv. C.S.C.
SECRETARY
Adv. C.S.C.
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-06-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
WPSS/1526/2026 - DINESH PRASAD THAPLIYAL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Summary: The court disposed of 12 consolidated writ petitions filed by Pharmacists appointed in 2006 seeking Old Pension Scheme benefits. The petitioners argued they were entitled to the Old Pension Scheme since the 2006 appointments stemmed from a 2005 re-advertisement of vacancies originally advertised in 2000, where candidates received age relaxation. The court permitted petitioners to file fresh representations within ten days, directing the competent authority to decide within four months thereafter with reasoned orders, as the State Counsel did not object to reconsidering the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
WPSS/1526/2026 - DINESH PRASAD THAPLIYAL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Summary: The court disposed of 12 consolidated writ petitions filed by Pharmacists appointed in 2006 seeking Old Pension Scheme benefits. The petitioners argued they were entitled to the Old Pension Scheme since the 2006 appointments stemmed from a 2005 re-advertisement of vacancies originally advertised in 2000, where candidates received age relaxation. The court permitted petitioners to file fresh representations within ten days, directing the competent authority to decide within four months thereafter with reasoned orders, as the State Counsel did not object to reconsidering the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts