Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5873 (UTT)

ANKIT RANA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMB/371/2026 · 2026-05-13

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:3644-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY 13th May, 2026 Writ Petition (M/B) 371 of 2026 Ankit Rana ------Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others -----Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Ms. Rajni Supyal Latwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.C.Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.) 1. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of qua warranto removing respondent no. 7 from the office of Gram Pradhan of village Harlalpur, Post Maheshpura, Block –Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, on the ground that she was less than 21 years of age at the time of her election. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 138 (1) (d) (iii) of Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016, in case, any person suffers from any disqualification mentioned in Clauses (a) to (u) of Sub Section (1) Section 8, he shall be removed 1 2026:UHC:3644-DB by the State Government. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would make representation to the State Government and prays for direction to the State Government to consider and decide the same expeditiously. 4. Learned State counsel has no objection to the same. 5. As under law, in case, a returned candidate suffers from any disqualification stipulated under various clauses of sub-section (1) of Section 8, the State Government has power to hold an inquiry and remove the said person, therefore, we are of the opinion that no purpose would be served in issuing notice of the instant petition to respondent no. 7 and keeping the matter pending. 6. Having regard to the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, we dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to make a representation to the State Government. In the event, the petitioner makes any such representation to the State Government, the State Government shall decide 2 2026:UHC:3644-DB the same, in accordance with law, after due notice and opportunity of hearing to respondent no. 7. 7. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 13.05.2026 Kaushal 3