Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5135 (UTT)

RAMESH CHANDRA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMB/108/2026 · 2026-02-25

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:1295-DB I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 2 5 TH FEBRUARY, 2 0 2 6 W RI T PETI TI ON ( M/ B) No. 1 08 OF 2 0 2 6 Ramesh Chandra. …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner. : Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the respondents. : Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. JUDGMENT : (per Sh r i Man oj Ku m ar Gu p t a, C.J.) 1. The case of the petitioner is that, for the purposes of submitting application for grant of a mining lease in District Bageshwar, instead of depositing the application fee of Rupees Three Lakhs in Treasury Office, Bageshwar, he deposited the same in Treasury Office, Haridwar. After realizing the mistake, the petitioner deposited another sum of Rupees Three Lakhs in Treasury Office, Bageshwar. He, thereafter, filed an application for refund of Rupees Three Lakhs deposited in the District Treasury Office, Haridwar. The Chief Treasury Officer, Haridwar, on 25.09.2019, wrote to the In-charge Officer, representing the District Magistrate, Haridwar, to issue 1 2026:UHC:1295-DB necessary advisory, so that the amount could be refunded to the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, so far respondent no. 3 has not issued the necessary advisory, and, as a result whereof, the amount, which was erroneously deposited by the petitioner at the Treasury Office, Haridwar, has not been refunded to him so far. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is foregoing the claim for interest, but his only prayer is that his application, for refund of the amount, be allowed. 4. Learned State Counsel does not object to the prayer made in this behalf. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent no. 3 to issue necessary advisory to the Treasury Officer, Haridwar, for refund of the amount to the petitioner, within two weeks from the date of communication of the instant order. The Chief Treasury Officer, Haridwar will ensure refund of the amount to the petitioner, within a further period of two weeks. 6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 2 2026:UHC:1295-DB 7. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 25th February, 2026 Rahul 3 RAHUL PRAJAPATI Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e66e6 1bf4c848741983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8A192F CAD15C390A1AAD7B39857D2540AE4C28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2026.02.26 16:45:04 +05'30'