UKHC010119812026 2026:UHC:5741-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 July 14, 2026 Special Appeal No.306 of 2026 Geetika Gurung ----Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others ----Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant Mr. J.C. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3 Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel for respondent no.4 JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta, C. J.) 1. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 06.07.2026 by which WPMS No.1880/2026 filed by the appellant, challenging the order of Secretary of District Level Development Authority, Nainital, rejecting the representation of the petitioner filed against the order of compounding of the building plan of private respondent nos.5 and 6, has been dismissed. 2. It appears that the building plan submitted by respondent nos.5 and 6 was sanctioned by the Competent Authority on 12.07.2019. It further appears that thereafter the compounding plans submitted by them were approved by the Competent Authority on 05.02.2024 and 03.07.2025. 1 UKHC010119812026 2026:UHC:5741-DB Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed WPMS No.2302/2025. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 05.01.2026 directing the Secretary, District Level Development Authority, Nainital to take decision on the representation of the appellant. In pursuance of the said direction, Secretary, District Level Development Authority, Nainital passed an order dated 14.05.2026 deciding the representation, whereby the representation was rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant preferred the writ petition, giving rise to the instant appeal. 3. Learned Single Judge has considered the entire facts of the case and has thereafter held that the appellant had not produced any evidence before the Secretary, District Level Development Authority, Nainital to substantiate the allegations made by her in the representation. The learned Single Judge has concluded that there is no illegality or perversity in the findings returned by the Secretary in his order. 4. We have heard Shri Arvind Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. He, however, is unable to demonstrate before us also as to how any of the findings recorded by the Secretary, District Level Development 2 UKHC010119812026 2026:UHC:5741-DB Authority, Nainital are, in any manner, illegal or perverse. In view of it, we find no illegality in the order of learned Single Judge. The appeal lacks merits and is dismissed accordingly. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 14.07.2026 Rajni 3