High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 06 UK CK 0016

Ram Gopal vs District Magistrate Udham Singh Nagar

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 11 June 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3261 Of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 234 words

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner is challenging the order dated 13.06.2014 passed by District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar. By the said

order, petitioner’s representation, claiming benefits available to Rajya Andolankari, has been rejected on the ground that no evidence as per

Government Order was produced by the petitioner to show that he had participated in Rajya Andolan.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to one Government Order dated 22.10.2008, in which L.I.U. report is one of the criteria for

identification of the person as Rajya Andolankari. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition, which is

a communication by Deputy Collector, Kichha. At item no. 125 of the said communication, against the name of the petitioner, there is a reference to

the report of L.I.U. submitted on 24.01.2009. This aspect, however, has been overlooked by the District Magistrate while passing the impugned order.

3.

In such view of the matter, the impugned order dated 13.06.2014 is liable to be quashed and the same is hereby quashed. The writ petition stands

allowed and the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar is directed to re-examine the matter and pass fresh order in respect of petitioner, in

accordance with law, as early as possible; but, not later than six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.