Authority: High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital

Order Date: 10 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: 102 contractual Junior Engineers (including individuals such as Ravindra Singh Chauhan and Pushkar Pal Singh Bisht) who had served the State PWD for 10‑15 years.
  • Respondents: State of Uttarakhand and the Public Works Department (PWD).
  • Nature of proceedings: Batch of writ petitions (Service Single Nos. 69, 79, 134, 135, 285, 359, 372, 374, 455, 457, 459, 482, 530, 531, 532, 533, 534, 536, 537, 538, 539, 540, 541, 564, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 575, 580, 581, 583, 584, 589, 653, 664, 665, 666, 742, 858, 889, 890, 891, 892, 901, 944, 968, 969, 970, 973, 991, 992, 993, 994, 1085, 1086, 1133, 1155, 1156, 1165, 1166, 1196, 1197, 1198, 1199, 1200, 1201, 1203, 1204, 1211, 1213, 1215, 1230, 1256, 1259, 1263, 1440, 1480, 1498, 1620, 1662, 1663, 1664, 1985, 1991 of 2026) seeking a writ of mandamus to be taken back into service and regularised.
  • Petitioners argued that their contractual appointments were not extended despite meeting minimum criteria and having long service tenure.
  • Several petitioners had obtained interim or stay orders (e.g., WPSS No.79 of 2026 – Ravindra Singh Chauhan, interim order dated 07.05.2026; WPSS No.1498 of 2026 – Pushkar Pal Singh Bisht, stay and interim order dated 10.06.2026) but were still not accommodated.

Court Findings & Directions

1. The State submitted that 83 petitioners could be accommodated against existing vacancies and an additional 19 vacancies would arise from promotions of Junior Engineers to Assistant Engineers, totaling 102 accommodated petitioners (as per instructions dated 06.08.2026).

2. The Court noted that the State had prioritized petitioners based on the dates of their interim orders, which the Court held cannot be a valid criterion for denial of accommodation.

3. The Court directed that the remaining petitioners, who were left out due to vacancy constraints, be placed in ten posts reserved for candidates with disabilities until such candidates are regularly selected.

4. Further, the Court ordered that any future vacancies should also be used to accommodate the petitioners and that the State must proceed with regularisation of all petitioners, disregarding any earlier rejections of their regularisation claims.

5. All the writ petitions in the batch are hereby disposed of.

Final Outcome

  • The High Court ordered the State of Uttarakhand to re‑engage all 102 contractual junior engineers, utilize disability‑reserved posts and future vacancies for any remaining petitioners, and to regularise them irrespective of prior rejections.
  • All writ petitions were dismissed on 10 August 2026, with the order authored by Justice Pankaj Purohit.

Topics: Employment, Judicial Orders