2026:UHC:3715-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (PIL) No.66 of 2026 14th May, 2026 Vikas Choudhary -----Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ----Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Amarendra Pratap Singh, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent nos.1 to 5. ----------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present writ petition has been filed ostensibly in public interest praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent nos.1 to 5 to forthwith recover a sum of ₹20,62,579/- from respondent nos.6 to 9; lodge FIR against them; and to take action against respondent no.6, the Village Pradhan under the provisions of Section 138 of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016. 3. The petitioner has alleged financial irregularities in execution of various developmental works in Gram Panchayat Shikarpur. It seems that twice inquiry has been held by the different committees and in which it transpired 1 2026:UHC:3715-DB that the Gram Pradhan and the officials were guilty of financial irregularities. The Block Development Officer Narsan, District Haridwar in his communication dated 23.03.2026 has stated about the findings of the three- members committee and, according to which, respondent nos.6 to 9 are liable to make good a loss of sum of ₹20,62,579/- to the Government. 4. Learned State Counsel has placed on record the instructions dated 12.05.2026 received from District Magistrate Haridwar. The stand taken therein is that after the report of the three-member committee the Pradhan made a representation to the effect that she cannot be held responsible for any work under MANREGA Scheme as she has no control over the work executed thereunder 5. It is stated that on receipt of the representation from the Pradhan, the Chief Development Officer directed the District Development Officer to get the matter re- examined through Block Development Officer within a week. It is stated that as soon as the Block Development Officer submits his report further action would be taken in the matter against the Pradhan and other officials as per provisions of the law. 6. As the representation of the Gram Pradhan is still under consideration and the respondents have stated that as soon as the decision on the representation of the 2 2026:UHC:3715-DB Pradhan is taken they would take further action in the matter if warranted, we are of the opinion that no purpose would be served in keeping the instant writ petition pending. The writ petition is disposed of by providing that the respondents shall proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with law and, in case, it is found in the inquiry and the proceedings which are underway that any financial loss has been caused to the State exchequer or any irregularity committed, appropriate action be taken against the guilty persons in accordance with law. 7. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 14.05.2026 SS 3