Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 237 (UTT)

M/S GORA PARAO STONE COMPANY v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMB/67/2026 · 2026-02-04

Siddhartha Sah

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMB No.67 of 2026 Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Ravi Sehgal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 3. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel has pointed out to Rule 15 of the Uttarakhand Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Illegal transport and Illegal Storage) Rule, 2015 thereof, provides for a remedy of appeal against the order of District Magistrate. 3. In that view of the matter, the writ petition would not be maintainable in view of the alternative remedy. 4. The writ petition is dismissed. However, in the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeal, if so advised, may be considered sympathetically by the appellate court. 5. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. [ (Siddhartha Sah, J.) Vacation Judge 04.02.2026 Ravi