Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/2405/2026 of SHAYRA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 11 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/2405/2026 Shayra --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Susheel
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.
UKHC010139762026
2026:UHC:7108 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/2405/2026
Shayra --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Susheel Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
“a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to create any unlawful or arbitrary obstruction in the petitioner’s lawful sale and transportation of milk by her cows and buffaloes and to permit the petitioner to carry on her lawful occupation and livelihood in accordance with law; b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to create any unlawful or arbitrary obstruction in the petitioner's bringing and transportation of fodder, khal, choker, bhusa and other essential cattle feed for the maintenance and survival of her cows and buffaloes, in accordance with law;
c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's representations dated 16.07.2026 in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned and speaking order within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;
d) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities and their subordinate officials not to unnecessarily harass or interfere with the petitioner in the lawful UKHC010139762026
2026:UHC:7108 conduct of her cattle-rearing and dairy activities, except in accordance with law.”
3. Time was given to learned State Counsel for seeking instructions. On instructions, he submits that petitioner’s husband was found involved in a case of tiger poaching. It is stated that a buffalo calf was killed by some wild animal and, in retaliation, petitioner’s husband poisoned the carcass of buffalo calf due to which a male Tiger cub was found dead on 18.05.2026 in the vicinity of the carcass of buffalo calf.
4. He submits that petitioner’s husband was arrested on 18.05.2026 and further that no interference is being caused by the forest authorities in the sale and transportation of milk by petitioner nor there is any obstruction caused in petitioner’s bringing fodder, khal, choker, bhusa and other cattle feed and drinking water.
5. In view of the statement made by learned State Counsel, no further direction is needed. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 11.08.2026 Mahinder/