The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition against IIM Kashipur after noting that the suspension challenge had become infructuous due to the petitioner’s subsequent dismissal from service. The Court granted liberty to raise related issues in a pending writ petition.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NAINITAL: The Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital has dismissed the Writ Petition filed against the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Kashipur, after holding that the petition had become infructuous following subsequent developments.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Ravindra Maithani and Justice Alok Mahra, passed the order after hearing counsel for both parties and reviewing the records.
Background of the Case
The petitioner had approached the High Court challenging his suspension order, claiming protection under the Whistleblowers Protection Act, 2014. He alleged that the disciplinary action taken by IIM Kashipur was retaliatory and sought multiple reliefs, including the quashing of the suspension and directions to act on his complaint dated September 20, 2023.
The writ petition was filed on 30 August 2024.
Arguments Presented
Respondents:
During the hearing, counsel for the respondents submitted that the writ petition had lost its relevance as, after the suspension, a departmental enquiry was completed, and the petitioner had already been dismissed from service.
Petitioner:
Counsel for the petitioner acknowledged that the dismissal order had been separately challenged through WPSB No. 484 of 2025, which is currently pending before the High Court.
High Court’s Observations
The Court observed that:
- The primary relief in the present writ petition related to suspension, which had already ceased to operate due to the dismissal.
- Issues arising from the dismissal order, including the grounds on which it was passed, could appropriately be addressed in the subsequent writ petition already filed by the petitioner.
- Any grievance relating to the petitioner’s complaint dated 20.09.2023 could also be incorporated into the pending writ petition challenging the dismissal.
In view of these facts, the High Court held that:
“Since the main relief with regard to suspension has already rendered infructuous and the dismissal order has already been challenged by the petitioner in the second petition, the instant writ petition has rendered infructuous.”
Accordingly, WPSB No. 549 of 2024 was disposed of, with liberty granted to the petitioner to raise relevant prayers, including those concerning his complaint, in the pending writ petition.
ALSO READ: Digital Arrest Scams Must Be Stopped: Supreme Court Directs CBI to Act Immediately
It is noteworthy that the petitioner had earlier filed multiple contempt petitions against various officials of IIM Kashipur. The High Court, in July 2025, dismissed those contempt petitions after finding no wilful disobedience or deliberate violation of court orders by the institute’s officials.
Appearance:
for the petitioner: Advocates Kartikey Hari Gupta and Rafat Munir Ali
for the respondents: Advocate Digvijay Nath Dubey
Care Title:
VINAY SHARMA Versus SANDEEP SINGH
WPSB/0000549/2024
READ ORDER
