Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3669 (UTT)

MOHAMMAD QAZIM RAZA v. UTTARAKHAND STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

WPMS/1024/2026 · 2026-04-24

Pankaj Purohit

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 WPMS No.1024 of 2026 Mohammad Qazim Raza …………Petitioner Vs. Uttarakhand State Information Commission and another ……….Respondents Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Aishwarya Prakash Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. There is no representation for the respondents. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 17.12.2025 issued by respondent no.1 in Second Appeal No.43613 of 2025-26, whereby the Second Appellate Court issued a show cause notice to the petitioner. 4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issuance of show cause notice is bad in the eyes of law, as the same has been issued after enlarging the scope of second appeal. 5. The petitioner instead of immediately approaching this Court, by filing the present writ petition, may raise all the contention placed here in the reply to the show cause notice, which shall definitely be dealt with by the Second Appellate Court as the order dated 17.12.2025 is merely a show cause notice. 6. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage. 7. Accordingly writ petition stands dismissed. However the petitioner may reply to the show cause notice ventilating his grievance as canvassed in the writ petition and the Second Appellate Court shall deal with all the grounds 2 raised by the petitioner, in his reply to the show cause notice. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 24.04.2026 SK