Uttarakhand High Court
WPPIL/17/2022 on 23 February, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
AND
SRI JUSTICE N.S. DHANIK, J.
WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 17 OF 2022
23RD FEBRUARY, 2022
BETWEEN:
Sobha Pandey & others .....Petitioners.
And
State of Uttarakhand & others ....Respondents.
Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned
Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.
Atul Bhatt, learned counsel.
Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. B.P.S. Mer, learned Brief
Holder for the State.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the
following
JUDGMENT :(per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)
Heard Mr. M.S. Tyagi, the learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the petitioners, and Mr. B.P.S. Mer, the learned
Brief Holder for the State.
2. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for
the following reliefs:-
"1. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing respondents no.1 to 4 to cancel the FL-
7 License (Annexure No.2) to run Liquor Bar and Beer Bar,
granted to respondent no.6, at the entrance of the
residential colony, in which colony the petitioners and many
others reside with their family.
2. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
certiorari quashing the FL-7 license (Annexure no.2) to run
Liquor and Beer Bar, granted to respondent no.6, at the
entrance of the residential colony in which colony the
petitioners and many others reside with their family.
3. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing respondents no.1 to 4, not to renuew
the FL-7 license (Annexure no.2) to run Liquor and Beer Bar,
granted to respondent no.6, at the entrance of the
residential colony in which colony the petitioners and many
others reside with their family.
4. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing respondent no.5 to prohibit, illegal
parking of vehicles, on the mandi bypass road and at the
gates of houses by the drunken persons.
5. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing respondents no.1, 2 and 5, to prohibit
entrance of the vehicles of the customers of respondent
no.6, through the 12 ft. wide land of the residential colony
named as Krishna Colony Phase-2 in which colony the
petitioners and many others reside with their family and at
the entrance of which colony respondent no.6 is situated.
6. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing respondents no.1, 2 and 5 to prohibit
commercial activities conducted by respondent nos.6 and 7
on the plot purchased by respondent no.7 in the year 2021
exclusively for residential purpose in the residential colony
named as Krishna Colony, Phase-2, in which colony the
petitioners and many others reside with their family".
3. It is apparent from the record that another writ
petition, namely Writ Petition (PIL) No.25 of 2019, is pending,
which was taken up on 22.05.2019. The present petitioners
have filed an application for intervention in the said writ
petition, which was rejected by a Division Bench of this Court
with an observation that they may file a writ petition
separately. In the meanwhile, certain allegations were made
by one Suresh Chandra Goyal, for which a report was
submitted by the Inspector, Excise, Government of
Uttarakhand, which appears on Page Nos.81 and 82 as
Annexure No.14 to this writ petition.
4. However, this writ petition has not been filed by the
said Suresh Chandra Goyal, against whom it is alleged that
he owned a banquet hall near the bar, in question. But, these
petitioners, relying on all the documents of said Suresh
Chandra Goyal, have filed this writ petition claiming that they
are residents of that particular colony, and they are being
prejudiced by the actions of the persons who come to the said
bar.
5. Be that as it may, it is established from the record
that, in fact, the petitioners have never made any
representation to any of the authorities before pressing for a
writ of mandamus.
6. It is settled principle of law that if any person is
aggrieved by any issue, he should approach the authorities
first before making a prayer for issuance of a writ of
mandamus.
7. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to
entertain this writ petition, and dispose of the same with the
liberty to the petitioners to make a representation to the
respondent No.2, the District Magistrate, Nainital, ventilating
their grievances within a period of ten days, by filing a copy
of this order, and appropriate documents.
8. On such an event, the respondent No.2, the District
Magistrate, Nainital shall, after affording a reasonable
opportunity of hearing and production of documents to the
petitioners, and the respondent Nos.6 and 7, shall consider
the matter and take a decision on the grievances of the
petitioners, strictly in accordance with law within a period of
thirty days from the date of production of a certified copy of
this order, by a speaking and reasoned order.
9. Urgency certified copy of this order be issued to the
parties on proper application.
(S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.)
(N.S. DHANIK, J.)
Dated: 23rd February, 2022
NISHANT
