RAJESH KUMAR CHAUHAN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

UKHC010198632026

2026:UHC:10283
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures

SL.
Date
No.

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

WPSS/2883/2026


Rajesh Kumar Chauhan
--Petitioner
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent

Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel for
the petitioner.
2. Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Deputy Advocate

General for the State.
3. By the instant writ petition the petitioner is
praying for the following reliefs:
i. “Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding respondents no. 3 and
4 to conclude the pending inquiry (including
the inquiry entrusted by letter No. 811/1-15
dated 03.09.2026) (Annexure no.12, page no.132-
133 to this writ petition) forthwith, and
commanding respondent no. 3 (the Disciplinary
Authority) to take a final decision in the
departmental proceedings initiated against the
petitioner by charge-sheet No. 3732/1-15 dated
16.06.2025, after considering the Inquiry Report
dated 09.04.2026, the clarificatory letter dated
20.06.2026, the petitioner's reply and the
material that has come on record before the
fresh Inquiry Officer, by a reasoned and
speaking order, within a period of 15 days from
the date of production of a certified copy of the
order of this Hon'ble Court, or within such
other short period as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding respondents no. 1. 2
and 3 to forward the Character Roll of the
petitioner and to consider the case of the
petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy
Ranger, on the basis of his seniority and service
record, in the Departmental Promotion

UKHC010198632026

2026:UHC:10283
Committee for the selection year 2026-27,
without treating the pendency of the present
proceedings as a bar, and, if the proceedings are
not concluded by then, to follow the sealed-
cover procedure strictly and to open the cover
and grant him promotion with all consequential
benefits from the date on which his immediate
juniors are promoted, on his exoneration or on
the proceedings ending in a result that does not
stand in the way of promotion.
iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding the respondents to
consider the case of the petitioner for promotion
in respect of the selection year 2025-26
(Vanadesh No. 115/1-12 dated 18.06.2025 and
No. 03/1-13 dated 11.08.2025), in which he
could not be considered on account of the
suspension later revoked, and to grant him
promotion with effect from the due date, with
all consequential benefits, if he is found fit, in
terms of the outcome of the final order.
iv. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding respondent no. 3 to
review the subsistence allowance of the
petitioner under Fundamental Rule 53(1)(a)(i)
for the period of suspension from 02.05.2025 to
30.04.2026, to enhance the same from 50% to
75% with effect from the expiry of three months
of suspension (02.08.2025), and to pay the
arrears to the petitioner within four weeks, with
interest at such rate as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit.”
4. The reliefs as prayed for appears to be
innocuous since the disciplinary proceeding is
pending since last more than one year. The
charge-sheet was already issued and the enquiry
was also completed but the disciplinary authority
was not satisfied with the enquiry report,
therefore, he direct for fresh enquiry.
5. Be that as it may, the disciplinary
proceeding should not be kept pending for long. It
has been apprised that the suspension has been
revoked but there are dues with regard to the
subsistence allowance, which the petitioner has
prayed for by relief (iv).
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that due to the departmental proceeding the
petitioner is not being considered for promotion.

UKHC010198632026

2026:UHC:10283
In this regard it is made clear that the law is very
well settled that due to the pending disciplinary
proceeding the promotion prospects of an
incumbent cannot be put on hold and in such an
eventuality the claim for promotion to be
considered by ignoring disciplinary proceeding
and the result be kept in a sealed envelope.
7. The procedure as observed above has to be
followed in letter and spirit. Therefore, this court
is of the view that the promotion prospects of the
petitioner cannot be withheld merely on the
ground that the disciplinary proceeding is
pending and the petitioner’s candidature should
be considered for promotion and the result be kept
in the sealed envelope and the same shall be
opened after the final outcome of the disciplinary
proceeding.
8. Since, the innocuous prayer is being prayed
for by the petitioner, hence, the instant writ
petition is disposed of finally with the direction to
the respondents to conclude the disciplinary
proceeding as early as possible preferably within
three months from the date of production of
certified copy of this order.




(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
05.11.2026
PR

UKHC010198632026

2026:UHC:10283