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

SURENDRA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Advocates:
['H C PATHAK', '', 'B D PANDE', 'HARSHIT SANWAL', 'C S C', 'SANDEEP KOTHARI']

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

ON THE 17th DAY OF JUNE, 2021

BEFORE:

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

Writ Petition (M/ S) No.1033 of 2021

BETW EEN:

Surendra Singh & Others

…..Petitioners

(By Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate)

AND:

State of Uttarakhand and others

(By T.S. Phartiyal, Addl. C.S.C. for the State and Mr. Manish

Lohani, Advocate i/ b Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for respondent

no.5)

…..Respondents

JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the parties

through video conferencing.

2.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner

has sought the following reliefs: -

I.

Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

mandamus

directing

and

commanding

the

respondent no.2 not to give mining license to the

respondent no.5 for carrying out mining operation

in respect of the areas Kosarijar and Chutgarh of

the village Khuldaurhi, District Bageshwar for

which the concerned villagers, including the

petitioners, have not given NOC to the respondent

no.5;

2

II.

Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction

restraining the respondent no.2 from according

license to the resp

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