WPMS/912/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 2509 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/912/2025 on 26 March, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

               Office N ot e s,
        Date      r e por t s,
                 or de r s or                   COURT'S OR JUD GE'S ORD ERS
               pr oce e dings
               or dir e ct ions
                      a nd
                Re gist r a r 's
                or de r w it h
                Sign a t u r e s
D/ 13                              WPMS No.912 of 2025
                                   Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Ms. Devika Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Suyesh Pant, Standing Counsel for the State.

Heard.

Admit.

Learned Chief Standing Counsel takes notices on behalf of respondent nos.1 and

At this stage notices may not be issued to the respondent nos.3 and 4. In case, it is required at a later stage, the Court may consider for issuing notices to the respondent nos.3 and 4. The respondent nos.1 and 2 may file their counter affidavit(s) within four weeks.

Two weeks thereafter, rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed.

List for final hearing on 23.06.2025. Heard on Interim Relief Application (IA) No.1 of 2025.

It is the claim of the petitioner that they had sent a recovery citation for recovery of certain amount from the respondent no.3. But, the recovery has not been made and the respondent nos.1 and 2 did return the recovery citation with the endorsement that no recovery was made. Thereafter, the petitioner entered into one time settlement with the respondent no.3 and now, the property is to be sold to the respondent no.4. But, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondent nos.1 and 2 are insisting for recovery charges.

By means of this interim relief application, the petitioner seeks directions that the respondents may be restrained to recover the recovery charges from the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would refer to the judgment of this Court passed in WPMS No.1199 of 2008, which is annexed as Annexure No.5 to the writ petition as well as the judgment passed in the case of Asha Textile Private Limited Vs. State of U.P., 1998 Supreme(All) 985, to argue that in such cases recovery charges may not be made, if no recovery is effected. Learned State counsel would submit that there is a Government Order of 2003, which mandates recovery of recovery charges.

The question that will fall for scrutiny is that, if no recovery was made, where is the question of recovery charges? And; in fact, it is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent no.1 did return the recovery citation with an endorsement that the recovery was not made.

Having considered, till the next date of listing, the respondent nos.1 and 2 shall not insist for recovery of the recovery charges from the petitioner. Interim Relief Application (IA) No.1 of 2025, stands disposed of.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 26.03.2025 Sanjay