Uttarakhand High Court
WPSB/550/2025 of SUNIL KUMAR SAHOO Vs BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED BHEL on 17 December 2025
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB No.550 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Ms. Shweta Jain, learned counsel for the
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.
2025:UHC:11283-DB SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPSB No.550 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Ms. Shweta Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner through V.C.
2. Mr. G.S. Negi, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State.
3. Mr. B.S. Adhikari, learned counsel for the respondents.
4. It is a case of the petitioner that he has been working in BHEL, CFFP Haridwar Unit as an Engineer Trainee since 04.11.2008. In the year 2015, he pursued a Post Diploma in Industrial Safety (PDIS) from the Regional Labour Institute (RLI), Kanpur, so as to fill up the vacancy of Safety Officer in the sponsored programme. Subsequently, the petitioner was appointed as Safety Officer in the establishment, but on 08.09.2025, the petitioner was transferred to M&S Department, CFPP, BHEL, Haridwar. This transfer order is challenged along with other related reliefs.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this petition she restricts her prayer for directing the respondent no.5/Labour Commissioner/Chief Factory Inspector to decide the appeal, which has been preferred by the petitioner, within a stipulated period. It is submitted that for other reliefs, petitioner would file fresh petition.
7. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the appeal may be decided within a period of three months.
8. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to respondent no.5 to decide the petitioner’s statutory appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties, within a
2025:UHC:11283-DB period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioner is also at liberty to agitate other issues in a separate petition.
(Alok Mahra, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.)
17.12.2025 BS
BALWANT SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2eacbf28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE5185F418755DC00A7A13C14A680C3F A90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.12.17 18:36:43 +05'30'