Uttarakhand High Court
SPA/290/2026 of NAGAR PANCHAYAT SWARGASHRAM JONK Vs MANMOHAN SEMWAL on 28 July 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Special Appeal No.290 of 2026 28th July, 2026 Nagar Panchayat Swargashram-Jonk and Another -----Appellants Versus Manmohan Semwal and
UKHC010112722026
2026:UHC:6480-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY
Special Appeal No.290 of 2026
28th July, 2026
Nagar Panchayat Swargashram-Jonk and Another
-----Appellants
Versus
Manmohan Semwal and Others
----Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, learned counsel for the appellants.
Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, learned counsel for respondent no.1.
Mr. Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.)
Delay Condonation Application (IA/2/2026)
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. Appeal is reported to be beyond time by 26 days. The explanation given for the delay is found to be satisfactory. Even otherwise, learned counsel for the respondents do not oppose the delay condonation application. Accordingly, delay condonation application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
SPA No.290 of 2026
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 05.05.2026 whereby non-appellant no.1 (petitioner in the writ petition) has been granted an interim order to the
UKHC010112722026
2026:UHC:6480-DB effect that no recovery shall be made from him pursuant to the order impugned in the writ petition. The order records submission of the petitioner that the impugned order was passed without providing opportunity of hearing to him.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Nagar Panchayat had given due notice of the proceedings to the petitioner but he remained absent on the date fixed for hearing.
5. Admittedly, the appellants have not applied for vacation of the interim order so far. There is absolutely no ground to interfere with the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge on the basis of the submission made before this Court, as it is open to the appellants to pray for vacation of the interim order by moving appropriate application before the Single Judge.
6. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the appellants to apply for vacation of the interim order, if so advised.
7. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 28.07.2026 SS