2026:UHC:1725 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No.1282 of 2023 13th March, 2026 Subir Mario Chowfin …………Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………..Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Priyanshu Mittal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Abhijay Negi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- 1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to return the petitioner’s personal research equipment like his boat, electric outboard motors and camera-traps etc. as show in the list of equipment in Annexure 13 which was used by him on large gharial nesting ground in Boksar in the core area of Corbett National Park, in working condition or the cost of the equipment at present market rates. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the department for compensating the petitioner for all the financial loss incurred by the project lapsing due to actions of the department, loss of salary that he would have earned from 2017 to 2020 and loss of dignity which was caused to him due to arbitrary ban levied on the petitioner. 2. After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press Prayer Clause No.2 in which he has prayed for compensation from the respondent-State. 3. Since the Prayer Clause No.2 is not being pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner the writ petition is dismissed in respect of Prayer Clause No.2. 1 2026:UHC:1725 4. It is case of the petitioner that the petitioner was granted permission by P.C.C.F. (Wildlife) vide order dated 18.11.2015, annexure no.8 to the writ petition, for conducting research work within the Corbett Tiger Reserve. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he conducted research for a period of six years and was granted an extension to continue the research for a further period of one year. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that he submitted the research report to the respondent-Department, but the respondent-Department withheld the equipments enumerated in annexure no.13, which are quoted as under:- “(1) One large steep cupboard. (2) One computer table and chair (3) Three plastic chairs (4) One large steel trunk in which the following were stored: (a) One Torqeedo 1003 S Electric Outboard Motor (b) Four Torqeedo 1003 S Electric Outboard Motor Batteries each of 915 Wh (c) Twenty units of TOMST standard TMS dataloggers (d) Fifteen units of Stealthcam Nigh Vision 940nm IR Camera Traps (e) Two Nikon Spotting Scopes (f) One Canon EOS 1000D DSLR Camera (g) Two units of Nikon Binoculars (h) Two life jackets (5) Two Burner Gas Stove (6) Small Gas Cylinder (7) Cooking Utensils” 7. Now the question which remains for consideration is that as to whether the petitioner will be returned his equipments or not. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a world renowned researcher and he needs the equipments which are very expensive for further research, therefore, he prayed this Court to direct the respondent to 2 2026:UHC:1725 return the equipments of the petitioner. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that on the basis of the counter affidavit that the respondents are ready to return the equipments and personal belongings to the petitioner withheld by the respondent-Department. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court feels that ends of justice would be met if the respondents are directed to return the equipments enumerated hereinabove in para no.6 of this judgment and order to the petitioner within a period of four weeks. Respondents shall return the equipments and personal belongings of the petitioner to him within a period of four weeks from today. 11 Accordingly writ petition stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 13.03.2026 SK 3