Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/2041/2026 of SURENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 17 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/2041/2026 Surendra Singh Chauhan --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPSS/2041/2026
Surendra Singh Chauhan --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Ms. Arundhati Sati, Advocate, holding brief of Ms. Abhilasha Tomar, Advocate for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Narayan Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent nos. 1 & 2.
3. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for the MDDA/respondent nos. 3 & 4.
4. Mr. Yashpal Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate for the UPNL/respondent no.
5.
5. Petitioner contends that he was engaged on contract as Junior Engineer in MDDA in 2022, however, his engagement was discontinued w.e.f. 08.07.2025 for the reason that vacancy on the post of Junior Engineer, against which petitioner was engaged, was supplied by regularly selected candidate and thereafter no vacancy is left for petitioner.
6. The representation made by petitioner, in terms of order of this Court passed in WPSS/1509/2025 for reengagement on the post of Technical Supervisor is rejected on the ground that post of Technical Supervisor is to be filled by direct recruitment through Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission.
7. Ms. Arundhati Sati, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the ground taken for rejecting petitioner’s claim for reengagement is legally unsustainable, as the post of Junior Engineer is also required to be filled by direct recruitment on the recommendation of Commission and if petitioner was engaged as Junior Engineer on contract in MDDA through outsourcing agency, then the explanation offered for not entertaining his request for reengagement does not appear to be justified.
8. This Court finds substance in the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. If there is vacancy available on the post of Technical Supervisor, then petitioner can be considered for engagement, till that vacancy is filled by regular appointment.
9. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel appearing for MDDA submits that the State Government has imposed ban on engagement of fresh employees through outsourcing.
10. The said ban also does not affect the petitioner, as petitioner was serving in MDDA, reportedly since 2022.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order dated order dated 26.05.2026 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed and the matter is remitted back to the Vice Chairman, MDDA to decide the representation made by petitioner, afresh.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 17.08.2026 Navin
NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a1 5, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A8 6DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.08.18 10:19:32 +05'30'