BUDDHA SINGH vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPMB /142/2026
Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: UKHC010033792026
Filing Number
WPMB /1810/2026
Filing Date
27-02-2026
Registration No
WPMB /142/2026
Registration Date
27-02-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )
Sub-Category
MINES & MINERALS ACT ( 15 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
23rd March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
BUDDHA SINGH
Adv. I D PALIWAL
DEEP CHANDRA
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
OFFICE OF GEOLOGY AND MINING UNIT
Adv. C.S.C.
COMMISSIONER
Adv. C.S.C.
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Adv. C.S.C.
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Adv. C.S.C.
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
FRESH CASES AS DEFECTIVE -236
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | FRESH CASES AS DEFECTIVE -236 |
Orders
The High Court of Uttarakhand quashed the State Government's revisional order dismissing the petitioners' challenge to illegal mining charges and royalty recovery orders. The court found that authorities failed to properly investigate the petitioners' claim that neighboring leaseholder Digvijay Singh conducted mining on their adjoining plot, merely noting but not addressing their contentions. The matter was remitted for fresh revision after conducting proper inquiry. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Uttarakhand quashed the State Government's revisional order dismissing the petitioners' challenge to illegal mining charges and royalty recovery orders. The court found that authorities failed to properly investigate the petitioners' claim that neighboring leaseholder Digvijay Singh conducted mining on their adjoining plot, merely noting but not addressing their contentions. The matter was remitted for fresh revision after conducting proper inquiry. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts