Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1289 (UTT)

SHRI NARAYAN ASHRAM TRUST v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

SPA/39/2026 · 2026-02-19

Alok Mahra, Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:1110-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. ALOK MAHRA Special Appeal No.39 of 2026 February 19, 2026 Shri Narayan Ashram Trust ………..Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ...…….Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Abhijay Negi and Mr. Harshvardhan Bhatt, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. Amarendra Pratap Singh, learned Addl. Advocate General along with Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT : (per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.) 1. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 10.02.2026 in WPMS No. 268 of 2026, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant-trust has been dismissed holding that the controversy raised in the writ petition involves adjudication of disputed questions of facts and which exercise cannot be done in exercise of writ jurisdiction. However, liberty has been reserved in favour of appellant-trust to avail common law remedies. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant tried to show that the appellant-trust has title over the land in 2026:UHC:1110-DB 2 respect of which a work order dated 09.07.2024 was issued for construction of mini stadium and was subject matter of challenge in the writ petition. 3. However, after making submissions at some length, learned counsel for the appellant states that liberty be reserved in favour of the appellant-trust to pursue the representation dated 12.01.2026 filed before the Collector. 4. Having regard to the facts of the case and the submission made, the appeal is disposed of with the clarification that the order of learned Single Judge would not come in the way of the appellant-trust in pursuing the representation which is stated to be pending before the Collector. 5. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.) (ALOK MAHRA, J.) Dated: 19.02.2026 Mamta