High CourtsDivision Bench

Devendra Singh vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 6 June 2017 · Citation: (2017) 06 UK CK 0016

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.M. Joseph, Alok Singh
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
190 of 2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 245 words
1.

This Appeal is sought to be maintained against the order

dated 04.05.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge, by which

the order impugned in the Writ Petition was stayed till the next

date of listing.

2.

We heard Mr. Virendra Kaparwan, learned counsel on

behalf of the appellant, Mr. C.S. Rawat, Additional Chief

Standing Counsel on behalf of the State, Mr. Jitendra

Chaudhary, learned counsel on behalf of respondent no. 5 and

Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned counsel for the Society.

3.

No doubt, learned counsel for the appellant would point

out that this is a case, where though the learned Single Judge

directed that the appellant be impleaded, till date the said order

has not been complied with. We are also told that on the date,

on which the matter stood posted, as per the impugned order,

the impugned order has been extended.

4.

In the circumstances, we would think that by the tenor of

the impugned order, we cannot treat it as a judgment within

the meaning of Rule 5 Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules. On

this short ground, we are not inclined to entertain this Appeal.

5.

Accordingly, the appeal will stand rejected. However, we

leave it open to the appellant to seek impleadment and also

vacation of the interim order. We leave open all the contentions

of the appellant.

6.

Subject to the same, the application for leave to appeal

and the Appeal will stand dismissed as not maintainable.