NISHITA ALIAS NISHITA PANWAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
AO/400/2025 · 2025-12-05
Alok Mahra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15951 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15951 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:10832 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
AO/ 4 0 0 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J.
Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M.S. Bhandari and Mr. Girveer Chand, learned counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. V.D. Bisen, learned Addl. C.S.C. along with Mr. P.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Mr. Devashish Rana, proxy counsel for Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
4. Mr. A.S. Rawat, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Sandeep Kothari,
learned counsel for respondent no.3.
5. Present appeal from order has been preferred by the appellant assailing the impugned judgment and order dated 24.09.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Uttarkashi in Misc. Civil Case/Election Petition No. 30 of 2025, filed under Section 131-H(10) of the Uttarakhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2016 (as amended up to 2024). By the said order, while deciding the application for interim relief/temporary injunction, the learned trial court has restrained the appellant from exercising her administrative as well as financial powers as Block Pramukh, Block Purola, District Uttarkashi, during the pendency of the election petition.
6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the present appeal is not maintainable in view of Rule 49 of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Settlement of Election Disputes) Rules, 1994, as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand, which provides that no
2025:UHC:10832 appeal shall lie against any interlocutory
order passed in an election petition.
7. Upon this, learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the present appeal, with liberty to avail an appropriate remedy as permissible under law.
8. Permission is accorded.
9. Accordingly, the appeal from order is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the appellant to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to him under the law.
[
( Alok Mahr a, J.)
05.12.2025 Mamta