Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(UK) 1295
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Manoj Kumar Gupta, CJ, Subhash Upadhyay, J
Col Retd Ranjeet Singh – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Firms Societies and Chits Uttarakhand – Respondent
Special Appeal No. 140 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pankaj Miglani
For the Respondents: J.C. Pande, Parikshit Saini
Interim orders should not be extended mechanically without considering subsequent material developments or court-ordered changes in status that may render the original interim relief infructuous or obsolete.
Headnote:The matter involves an intra-court appeal against an order extending an interim stay in a writ petition concerning the management of a residents welfare association. The appellant contended that following a court-mandated election conducted by the Additional District Magistrate, he was elected as President and took charge, rendering the previous interim stay infructuous. The court found that the learned Single Judge extended the interim order without considering these subsequent material developments and the pending impleadment application. The primary issue was whether an interim order could be mechanically extended without taking notice of subsequent events, specifically a court-ordered election that altered the status of the parties. The court reasoned that the extension of the interim order was improper as it ignored the fact that fresh elections had been held in pursuance of the court's own directions, thereby upsetting the prevailing position. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the extension of an interim stay after a change in the factual status of the governing body. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. verification of court-mandated election processes and the resulting change in leadership. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. interim orders cannot be extended mechanically while ignoring subsequent material developments that render them infructuous. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT:
(per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.
1. Heard Mr. Pankaj Miglani, leaned counsel for the appellant, Mr. J.C.Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondents no. 1 & 2 and Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.
2. The present intra court appeal has been filed against the order dated 27.04.2026, passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 402 of 2023, by which, interim order dated 17.02.2023 has been extended till the next date i.e. 14.07.2026. Interim order dated 17.02.2023 is as follows:
“ In the interregnum, the effect and operation of the order dated 28.01.2023(Annexure No. 21 to the writ petition) passed by respondent no. 2 shall remain stayed. Stay application (IA No. 01 of 2023) stands disposed of.”
3. Learned counsel for the appellant invited our attention towards the fact that on the impleadment application filed by the appellant in the writ petition, the Court granted time to non-appellant no.3 to file objection. The interim order was only for a limited duration and it was not extended after 03.01.2024. On 17.10.2024, learned Single Judge passed a specific order that the impleadment application would be considered on the next date along with connected matters. He submits that on 01.09.2025, the Court noted in its order the fact that by order dated 11.01.2024 it had appointed Additional District Magistrate, Haridwar as Election Officer to conduct election of Aarogyam Residents Welfare Association. In pursuance of the said order, election has been conducted. After noting the said fact, the Court directed the Additional District Magistrate to declare the result of the election at the earliest possible. He submits that in pursuance of the said direction, result was declared and a certificate was issued on 20.09.2025 in favour of the elected persons. The appellant was elected as President and he was permitted to take charge of the newly formed body vide letter dated 27.10.2025. The same was put to challenge by non-appellant no.3 in WPMS No. 3186 of 2025, and finally the said writ petition was got withdrawn by the petitioner on 06.01.2026. It is submitted that the learned Single Judge instead of passing order on the impleadment application and taking notice of the facts mentioned in the affidavit dated 19th April, 2026, that fresh election has taken place and the appellant has been elected as President has simply extended the interim order dated 17.02.2023, which according to learned counsel for the appellant had ceased to subsist in view of the subsequent orders.
4. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submits that in other connected matters, there was specific order for not declaring the result of fresh election without leave of the Court and that other appeals are also pending. He thus submits that the instant matter be taken up along with other appeals.
5. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 does not dispute that the interim order granted by this Court initially on 17.02.2023 was not extended after 03.01.2024. He also does not dispute that on 11.01.2024, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, Additional District Magistrate, Haridwar was appointed as Election Officer to conduct the election of the society as per byelaws within three months. For ready reference, the said order is extracted herein below:
“1. Mr. A.S. Rawat, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. Harshvardhan Dhanik, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for
