VED PRAKASH TYAGI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this appeal, the judgment dated 10.3.2014, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, has been assailed. Simultaneously, the prayer has also been advanced in this appeal that the writ petition of Mr. Tyagi (appellant/petitioner) should be allowed in toto by this Appellate Court itself.

(2.) HAVING heard learned Counsel for each and every party at length, we feel that it would not be desirable on our part to adjudicate the matter in issue in the writ petition as the same would tantamount to taking over the jurisdiction of the writ court. More so, by way of instant appeal, basically the impregnability of the judgment of learned Single Judge, whereby he has refused to entertain the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternate statutory remedy to the petitioner, has been questioned. So, we are keeping ourselves limited only to the extent of this aspect which itself now has become an issue between the parties. However, mentioning of some facts are indispensable in order to arrive at the correct finding on this controversy.

(3.) ON the complaints made to Uttarakhand Board, raising the issue of dual registration at a time, show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 28.6.2011 by the Registrar of Uttarakhand Board. Ultimately, Uttarakhand Board cancelled the registration of the petitioner on 9.5.2013 and later refused to uphold the registration up to 10.3.2016.