AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 262 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Since common question of facts and law involved in all these writ petitions, they are heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
In all these writ petitions, the petitioners seek directions that the respondent authorities may be directed to regularize the services of the petitioners against the vacant posts, which are still lying vacant in the respondent Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University (Central), Srinagar Garhwal (“the University”).
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that similar controversy has already been decided on 20.03.2018, by this Court in WPSS No.425 of 2014, Kumesh Kumar and others Vs. H.N.B. Garhwal University, Central University, Srinagar and others, and the respondent authorities has already been directed to consider the case of the petitioners against the vacant posts.
Learned counsel for the respondent(s)/the University would admits that the similar controversy had already been decided by this Court in WPSS No.425 of 2014, Kumesh Kumar and others Vs. H.N. B. Garhwal University, Central University, Srinagar and others; and in WPSS No.44 of 2024, Ramkishan Pandey and others vs. Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Central University and another. He would submit that the cases of the petitioners shall be considered for regularization on the respective posts, which are still vacant.
Since the controversy is already covered, instant petitions are decided in terms of the judgment dated 20.03.2018 of this Court passed in WPSS No.425 of 2014, Kumesh Kumar and others Vs. H.N.B. Garhwal University, Central University, Srinagar and others.
