SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(UK) 800

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
SHADMA SIDDIQUI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Office Notes, reports, S N L o . . Date o R r e d o g e r is r d s tr i r o a e r r c ’s p t i r o o o r n c d s e e e a r d n w i d n i g th s COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS Signatures SPA No.447 of 2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Mr. Atul Kumar Bansal, learned counsel for appellants appeared through V.C.

2. Mr. R. C. Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

4. This is an intra-Court appeal against judgment dated 24.11.2025 rendered by learned Single Judge in WPMS No.3210 of 2025. By the said order, challenge thrown by appellant to a sealing order passed under Section 28-A of the Uttarakhand Urban and Country Planning Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was rejected on the ground that he has remedy of appeal under clause 4 of Section

28-A of the Act.

5. Appellant has challenged the judgment rendered by learned Single Judge on the ground that the sealing order is passed against one Mr. Javed Siddique, who has nothing to do with the property in question, and appellant’s appeal would not be entertained, as the order of sealing is not passed against him.

6. Learned counsel for th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top