HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1235 of 2025 (M/S) Ramesh Sajwan ….......Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others …..... Respondents Present : Mr. T.P.S. Takuli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Devendra Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent no.4/the Principal, Sri Dev Suman Government Inter College, Chamba, Tehri Garhwal (“the college”). By it, the permission granted to the petitioner for holding exhibition in the college ground has been cancelled. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The petitioner stalls amusement parks; book fairs; skill games, etc. in mela pradarshans organized in different parts of Uttarakhand. On 05.02.2025, he applied for such permission from the respondent no.2/the Chief Education Officer, Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal, for installation of entertainment exhibition in the ground of the college. On 17.02.2025, the respondent 2 no.4/the Principal of the college, granted permission to the petitioner vide Letter No.265, dated 17.02.2025, but suddenly, on 18.03.2025, this permission was cancelled on the ground that prior to grant of permission to the petitioner, permission had already been granted to some other person. The order of cancelation is impugned in this petition with related reliefs. 4. Learned State Counsel was required to get instructions in the matter. Learned State Counsel has received the instructions. They have been tendered for the perusal of the Court. Let them be taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had been granted permission on 17.02.2025. Thereafter, its cancellation on 18.03.2025, is against the principle of natural justice, and without any basis. The petitioner has a right to install his entertainment exhibition in the ground of the college. 6. Learned State Counsel would submit that as per instructions, on 10.02.2025, the Principal of the college was on leave. Therefore, the Incharge Principal had granted permission to one Manoj Bhandari for exhibition in the ground of the college. When the Principal 3 of the college resumed his duties, unaware of the earlier permission granted to one Manoj Bhandari by the Incharge Principal, he, on 17.02.2025, again granted permission to the petitioner for exhibition. Subsequently when the Principal of the college came to know about the earlier permission granted on 10.02.2025 to one Manoj Bhandari by the Incharge Principal, on 18.03.2025, the permission granted to the petitioner has been cancelled. 7. On the last date, a communication was placed before this Court by which the permission was to Manoj Bhandari vide Letter No.263(3), dated 10.02.2025. After perusal of it, the Court had also called the dispatch register of the college. It has entry of both the letters. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that reading of the dispatch register reveals as if it is manipulated. 9. The petitioner claims that his permission has wrongly been cancelled, whereas, on behalf of the respondent-State, grounds have been shown, which is that on 10.02.2025, permission to hold exhibition had already been granted by the Incharge Principal of the college to one Manoj Bhandari. Subsequently, when the Principal of the college resumed duties, he, unaware of 4 the grant of earlier permission, again, on 17.02.2025, granted permission to the petitioner. But when the Principal of the college came to know about the earlier permission granted on 10.02.2025, he had cancelled the permission granted in favour of the petitioner. The letters have been included in the dispatch register. They have been placed for the perusal of the Court. Therefore, this Court does not see any reason to make any interference. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 10. The writ petition is dismissed. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 16.05.2025 Ravi Bisht