Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8231 (UTT)

EXECUTIVE OFFICER NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD v. RISHABH KAUSHIK

SPA/195/2024 · 2025-03-24

Alok Mahra, G Narendar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:2090-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA 24TH MARCH, 2025 SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 195 OF 2024 Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad & another …...Appellants Versus Rishabh Kaushik & others …….Respondents Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. Harendra Belwal, learned counsel. Counsel for the State : Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel. Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Mr. Anup Kumar Verma, learned counsel JUDGMENT :(per Mr. G. Narendar, C.J.) IA No.02 of 2024 is preferred praying condonation of delay of 12 days in preferring the appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that they have no objection. 3. The submission is placed on record. 4. We have perused the grounds made in support of the delay. The delay condonation application is allowed and the delay of 12 days stands condoned. 1 2025:UHC:2090-DB Special Appeal No.195 of 2024 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents. 6. The appellants are, in the instant intra-court appeal, being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, whereby the learned Single Judge has been pleased to partly allow the writ petition, set-aside the punishment imposed, and reserve liberty to the respondent- Nagar Palika to proceed de novo inquiry against the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the 2003 Rules. Learned Single Judge has been pleased to grant liberty in view of the provisions of Rule 29(1) of the Rules of 2017 and the concession by the learned counsel for the Nagar Palika. The concession by learned counsel for the Nagar Palika is recorded in Paragraph No.5 of the order impugned. 7. In that view of the matter, the instant appeal, in our opinion, is misconceived and the appellant- Nagar Palika shall forthwith re-commence the proceedings in accordance with the liberty reserved by the learned Single Judge. 2 2025:UHC:2090-DB 8. The appeal being misconceived is dismissed. 9. As a sequel thereto, pending application, if any, shall stand closed. ________________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. _____________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 24th March, 2025 NISHANT 3