IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Special Appeal No. 70/2014
Dr. Ved Prakash Tyagi ... Appellant Versus
Union of India & 6 Other ... Respondents Mr. Jeevan Prakash Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant/petitioner. Mr. B.P.S. Mer, Advocate, for the Union of India/respondent 1. Mr. Subhash Upadhyaya, C.S.C., for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents 2 and 3.
Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Advocate, for the respondents 4 and 5. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Advocate, for the respondent 6. Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate, for the respondent 7.
JUDGMENT
Coram: Hon'ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. Hon'ble U.C. Dhyani, J.
Per : Hon'ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.
By way of this appeal, the judgment dated 10.3.2014, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, has been assailed. Simultaneously, the prayer has also been advanced in this appeal that the writ petition of Mr. Tyagi (appellant/petitioner) should be allowed in toto by this Appellate Court itself.
2. Having heard learned Counsel for each and every party at length, we feel that it would not be desirable on our part to adjudicate the matter in issue in the writ petition as the same would tantamount to taking over the jurisdiction of the writ court. More so, by way of instant appeal, basically the impregnability of the judgment of learned Single Judge, whereby he has refused to entertain the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternate statutory remedy to the petitioner, has been questioned. So, we are keeping ourselves limited only to the extent of this aspect