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.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010033792026

Filing Number

WPMB/1810/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

WPMB/142/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-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

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 30-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BUDDHA SINGH

    Adv. I D PALIWAL

  2. 2.DEEP CHANDRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

  2. 2.OFFICE OF GEOLOGY AND MINING UNIT

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.COMMISSIONER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  5. 5.ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta,Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash UpadhyayView PDF

    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.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Fresh Cases As Defective -236

    Registrar (Judicial)

  4. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMB/142/2026

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case