Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/52/2023 of KAMAL SINGH KATIYAR Vs DISTRICT MAGISTRATE NAINITAL 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/52/2023 Kamal Singh Katiyar --Petitioner Versus District Magistrate Nainital --Respondent Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. There is no
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.
UKHC010002332023
2026:UHC:7122 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/52/2023
Kamal Singh Katiyar --Petitioner Versus District Magistrate Nainital --Respondent
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
There is no representation for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 1 to forthwith release the amount of e-stamp in favour of petitioner amounting to Rs.1,06,500/- alongwith penal interest.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 11-11-2022 (contained as Annexure no. 7 to this writ petition).
4. Learned Sate Counsel has produced in Court written instructions issued by Chief Treasury Officer, Nainital on 05.08.2023 along with other papers.
5. Perusal of the documents enclosed with the written instructions reveals that a sum of `95,850/- was refunded to petitioner vide order dated 14.03.2023, UKHC010002332023
2026:UHC:7122 passed by Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Nainital.
6. Since the substantial part of the amount of e-stamp purchased by petitioner has been refunded, after deducting 10% of that amount towards expenses, therefore, the relief as claimed by the petitioner do not survive.
7. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 11.08.2026 Navin