FATE SINGH vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - C.S.C. — WPMS/1200/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.

Next hearing 10-Jun-2026

CNR: UKHC010070912026

Filing Number

WPMS/3700/2026

Filing Date

29-Apr-2026

Registration No

WPMS/1200/2026

Registration Date

29-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

MISC MATTERS ( 47 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Last updated 06-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.FATE SINGH

    Adv. B M PINGAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - C.S.C.

  2. 2.ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

    Adv. NARESH PANT

  4. 4.COMMISSIONER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  5. 5.CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  6. 6.UTTARAKHAND HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION

    Adv. NARESH PANT

  7. 7.AJAY SINGH

Case History

  1. 10-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 10-Jun-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  3. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

    Case Summary: WPMS 1200/2026 Fate Singh challenged recovery orders requiring deposit of ₹11,46,666.66 related to land acquisition compensation for NH-94 widening. The court found merit in petitioner's argument that the Additional District Magistrate (C.A.L.A.) lacked jurisdiction to pass recovery orders after becoming *functus officio* following the original award. The petition was adjourned to 10.06.2026; the impugned orders' effect and operation were stayed pending counter-affidavits from respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 02-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 29-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/1200/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPMS 1200/2026 Fate Singh challenged recovery orders requiring deposit of ₹11,46,666.66 related to land acquisition compensation for NH-94 widening. The court found merit in petitioner's argument that the Additional District Magistrate (C.A.L.A.) lacked jurisdiction to pass recovery orders after becoming *functus officio* following the original award. The petition was adjourned to 10.06.2026; the impugned orders' effect and operation were stayed pending counter-affidavits from respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case