The High Court confirmed that appellants may withdraw a special appeal with liberty to seek similar relief before an appropriate forum or authority, without adjudicating on merits. This upholds procedural practice, does not overrule or establish substantive precedent, and serves as a procedural reference for future cases involving withdrawal requests.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | SPA/283/2025 of SRI SRI 1008 NARAYAN SWAMI CHARITABLE TRUST Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND |
| CNR | UKHC010142922025 |
| Date of Registration | 10-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR JUSTICE G. NARENDAR (per) |
| Concurring or Dissenting Judges | HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY (concurred) |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Bench | Division Bench: Chief Justice G. Narendar, Justice Subhash Upadhyay |
| Precedent Value | Limited (Procedural) |
| Questions of Law | Whether appellants can withdraw a special appeal with liberty to approach competent authority |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court allowed the appellants to withdraw the appeal and expressly reserved liberty to approach the competent authority for similar relief(s). There was no adjudication on merits and no substantive legal determination. The procedural aspect—that such withdrawals with liberty may be permitted—was reiterated. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | None; procedural order only (parties to this appeal) |
| Persuasive For | Reference for similar withdrawal applications in Uttarakhand HC |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The High Court formally permitted withdrawal of the special appeal with liberty to seek relief before a competent authority.
- No findings were made on merits; the judgment will not operate as res judicata.
- Lawyers should note that dismissal as withdrawn with liberty preserves substantive rights for further recourse.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The appellants’ counsel sought leave to withdraw the appeal, requesting liberty to approach the competent authority with similar reliefs.
- The Court recorded the submission, expressly reserved liberty to the appellants, and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
- No substantive adjudication of the issues or merits took place.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Appellants):
- Sought leave to withdraw the special appeal.
- Requested reservation of liberty to approach the competent authority with similar relief(s).
Respondent:
- No recorded arguments on merits or on the withdrawal; none stated in the order.
Factual Background
- The appellants, Sri Sri 1008 Narayan Swami Charitable Trust and another, had filed a special appeal.
- Before any substantive hearing or adjudication, learned counsel for the appellants moved to withdraw the appeal with liberty to seek similar relief from a competent authority.
- There is no further summary of underlying facts or previous proceedings in the judgment.
Statutory Analysis
- No statutory provisions were discussed or interpreted in the judgment.
- The order pertains solely to withdrawal and reservation of liberty, with no statutory analysis included.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
There is no dissenting or separate concurring opinion; both bench members signed the order of withdrawal.
Procedural Innovations
- The Court’s order confirms the procedural practice of allowing withdrawal of appeals with liberty to approach competent authorities.
- No new procedural precedents, rules, or guidelines were set.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Routine procedural order; no substantive law established or overruled.