Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7924 (UTT)

PAWAN KUMAR JAISWAL v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

SPA/156/2025 · 2025-07-02

Alok Mahra, G Narendar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:5640-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. ALOK MAHRA Special Appeal No.156 of 2025 2nd July, 2025 Pawan Kumar Jaiswal --Appellant Versus District Magistrate/ District Collector and Others. --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. Gajendra Tripathi and Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, learned Standing Counsel for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT : (per Mr. G. Narendar C. J.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Having heard the learned counsels, we are of the opinion that no cause of action lies within the jurisdiction of this Court and it is the High Court of Madhya Pradesh that would be the Court of Competent Jurisdiction, as the demand for collection as revenue arrears is by the State Government of Madhya Pradesh and the certificate for collecting the same as revenue arrears has been issued by the District Collector, Ujjain. The District Collector, Dehradun being merely an 2025:UHC:5640-DB 2 executing authority and the action being a mere consequential action, the demand for collection as revenue arrears and the consequential certificate arising within the jurisdiction of Madhya Pradesh High Court, being the primary relief that ought to be sought for, we are of the opinion that the instant special appeal is not maintainable and the appellant/petitioner is to be relegated to exercise his right before the High Court of Competent Jurisdiction. 3. Accordingly, the Special Appeal is disposed of as being one without jurisdiction. In that event, the appellant/petitioner is granted a limited protection of two weeks time and the order of attachment shall not be taken to its logical conclusion for a period of two weeks only. Accordingly, we uphold the order of learned Single Judge. (G. NARENDAR, C. J.) (ALOK MAHRA, J.) Dated: 02.07.2025 BS BALWANT SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2eacbf 28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE5185F 418755DC00A7A13C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.07.03 14:07:04 +05'30'