Uttarakhand High Court
WPSB/391/2026 of KRITICA NEGI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 6 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY 06th July, 2026 Writ Petition (S/B) No.391 of 2026 r Dr. Kritica Negi ------Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ----Respondents
UKHC010113872026
2026:UHC:5378-DB
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY
06th July, 2026
Writ Petition (S/B) No.391 of 2026
r
Dr. Kritica Negi
------Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others
----Respondents
Presence:-
Mr. S.S. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.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.
1. The present writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:- “i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 and No.2 to schedule a meeting and consider the case of the petitioner for the counting of the previous service worked as ad-hoc between 11.08.2016 till 07.04.2021 under Motilal Nehru College of the University of Delhi annexed as (Annexure No. 2 (Colly) page as an Assistant Professor (Political Science) for CAS benefit under the Higher Education of Uttarakhand, State of Uttarakhand.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to take decision on the case of the petitioner as per provisions of UGC Regulations 2010 Clause 10.1 and UGC Regulations 2018 Clause 10(f)(iii) (Annexure No. 11 & No. 12 page70-80 as early as possible.
iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus direction the respondents to take decision and provide the CAS benefit and also permit the petitioner to move the application for CAS like it has been given by the State in the case of Dr. Kamal Dev Lal (Assistant Professor Physics) and Dr. Manjari Aggarwal (Assistant Professor Management) (Annexure No. 4 page 22).
iv. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 and No.2 to exercise the proceeding for the counting of previous service like it has been provided in the Government Order dated 30.06.1992 (Annexure No.... 7.... at page 56-60 as it has been pleaded in para 08 of the body of the writ petition.”
UKHC010113872026
2026:UHC:5378-DB
2. Learned State Counsel very fairly states that the representation filed by the petitioner would be decided.
3. Accordingly, at this stage, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no.1 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 27.03.2026 within eight weeks’ from the date of communication of the instant order along with photostat copy of the representation.
4. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 06.07.2026 KKS/PP