2025:UHC:8558 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2685/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. U.K. Uniyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ganesh Dutt Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General for the State. 2. A recovery certificate was issued on 25.03.2025 by Secretary, Irrigation for recovery of Rs. 6.36 crore as water tax from the petitioner, pursuant to which the District Magistrate issued necessary instructions on 11.04.2025 to Tehsildar, Ghansali. 3. Tehsildar, Ghansali, issued a letter to petitioner on 21.04.2025, asking him to deposit the amount mentioned in recovery certificate, with recovery charges. Thus, feeling aggrieved by letter issued by Tehsildar, Ghansali, petitioner approached this Court. Petitioner also challenged the symbolic attachment order. 4. During the course of argument, Mr. U.K. Uniyal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that a settlement has been arrived at between petitioner and the State Government, pursuant to which petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 2.92 crore with Secretary, Irrigation (respondent No. 4 herein) and petitioner has undertaken to deposit balance 2025:UHC:8558 amount on or before 28.02.2026. 5. He prayed that in view of the settlement, arrived at between petitioner and the State Government, the writ petition may be disposed of. 6. Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned State Counsel fairly submits that pursuant to settlement arrived at between the parties, petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 2.92 crore and remaining amount has to be deposited by petitioner by February, 2026. He further submits that in case petitioner fails to deposit balance amount within the deadline indicated in the settlement, then State authorities shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner, as per law. 7. In view of consensus between the parties, the order of symbolic attachment passed on 10.09.2025 is set aside. However, respondent shall be at liberty to proceed in the matter, as per law, against petitioner if there is any default on his part in abiding with the terms of the settlement. 8. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 23.09.2025 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43 D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.09.25 18:35:29 +05'30'