UKHC010137092026 2026:UHC:6878 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2357/2026 Tarendra Prasad Dimri --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Deputy AG, for the State. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate, for the respondent no. 3. (2) By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “i. Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent nos. 1 to 3 to hold an enquiry in the manner in which vriti is being distributed amongst the members of the Dimmer Ummatta Panchayat by respondent no. 3 on the recommendation of Respondent no. 4. ii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent no. 4 to distribute vriti in Shri Badrinath Temple complex to members strictly in terms of seniority. iii. Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to give ‘vriti’ to petitioner as per his seniority.” (3) Learned State Counsel submits that petitioner has not raised any grievance either against the State Government or against Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee. (4) Mr. Ravi Babulkar, learned Counsel appearing for Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee, submits that petitioner has UKHC010137092026 2026:UHC:6878 raised grievance against respondent no. 4 and no writ petition would lie for the relief as claimed in the writ petition. He further points out that respondent no. 4 is not ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, therefore public law remedy would not be available for seeking the reliefs, as have been sought. (5) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has made representation to Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee, who may be directed to take decision thereupon. (6) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, writ petition is disposed of with a request to Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee to consider petitioner’s representation and pass appropriate order, as per law, within eight weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. It goes without saying that respondent no. 4 and other stakeholders shall also be heard before passing any order on petitioner’s representation. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 5.8.2026 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957 BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.08.05 18:28:02 +05'30' UKHC010137092026 2026:UHC:6878