SAURABH FULARA vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPMS/915/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010056922026

Filing Number

WPMS/3004/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

WPMS/915/2026

Registration Date

09-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

REHABILITATION MATTERS ( 59 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 23-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAURABH FULARA

    Adv. NITIN TEWARI,C K SHARMA,C K SHARMA, ,C K SHARMA

  2. 2.BINDU FULARA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

  2. 2.SECRETARY

    Adv. DEPUTY S.G.

  3. 3.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

    Adv. NARESH PANT

  5. 5.COMPETENT AUTHORITY

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

    Summary The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Saurabh Fulara and another challenging the compensation amount for their property acquired by NHAI for National Highway construction. The court held that the petitioners' grievance regarding inadequate compensation for the commercial aspect of the property should be raised through arbitration under Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act, 1956 before the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, not through writ jurisdiction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/915/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Saurabh Fulara and another challenging the compensation amount for their property acquired by NHAI for National Highway construction. The court held that the petitioners' grievance regarding inadequate compensation for the commercial aspect of the property should be raised through arbitration under Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act, 1956 before the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, not through writ jurisdiction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case