Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/2434/2026 of FAEEM AHMAD Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 14 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2434/2026 Faeem Ahmad --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Mr. G.D. Joshi,
UKHC010141582026
2026:UHC:7270
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/2434/2026
Faeem Ahmad
--Petitioner
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mr. G.D. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Devendra Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. Petitioner has challenged order dated 01.01.2026 passed by Adjudicating Officer/Additional District Magistrate, Nainital under provisions of Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006. Petitioner has also challenged the consequential recovery citation issued by Tehsildar, Ramnagar on 23.07.2026 for recovery of ₹80,000/-.
4. Learned State Counsel submits that petitioner has remedy of filing appeal before Food Safety Tribunal under Section 70 of the aforesaid Act, and the order of the Tribunal is thereafter appealable under Section 76 of the said Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that limitation provided for approaching Food Safety Tribunal is only 45 days. He submits that petitioner came UKHC010141582026
2026:UHC:7270 to know about the impugned order only on 23.07.2026.
6. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that notice regarding proceeding pending before Additional District Magistrate, Nainital was duly served upon petitioner.
7. Be that as it may, since petitioner has remedy of appeal under Section 70 of Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006., therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach appropriate Authority. If petitioner files appeal within ten days from today, the same shall be heard and decided, ignoring the question of limitation, as per law. Only for a period of ten days, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner on the strength of impugned recovery citation.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
14.08.2026 Aswal
NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A585 31726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2026.08.14 06:07:32 -07'00'