VISHESH KUMAR v. CHAIRMAN NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
WPMS/885/2026 · 2026-04-27
Pankaj Purohit
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3634 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3634 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:3130 SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No.885 of 2026 Vishesh Kumar
--Petitioner Versus Chairman National Highways Authority of India and Others
--Respondents Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
None present for petitioner.
2. Mr. Naresh Pant, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3/NHAI, through V.C.
3. Mr. Devendra Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent Nos.4 and 5.
4. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner seeking a direction to respondents to release the enhanced compensation amount of Rs.99,24,909/- to him and proforma respondents in terms of
judgment and order dated 12.12.2025 passed by learned District Judge, Haridwar in Arbitration Misc. Case No.88 of 2018.
5. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3-NHAI categorically stated that the amount, so assessed, had already been deposited by respondent-NHAI to CALA and it is upto CALA for distribution of the said amount.
6. This Court vide
order dated 17.04.2026 directed learned State Counsel to take instruction from respondent-CALA within a week as to why the money is not being paid to petitioner and proforma respondents in view of the aforesaid
2026:UHC:3130
judgment and order dated 12.12.2025.
7. Today, learned State Counsel passed on to this Court instruction dated 24.04.2026, which is taken on record.
8. On the basis of instruction, learned State Counsel submits that the money has been disbursed in favour of the petitioner as well as that of proforma respondents by depositing the same in their bank accounts on 21.04.2026 and no money is left to be paid to them. Statement of the Bank Accounts of petitioner as well as of proforma respondents has also been produced before this Court along with the instruction.
9. In view of the above, nothing is left to be decided in the present writ petition and the same has rendered infructuous.
10. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
27.04.2026 PN