Disposed¶4

Barkha Kanyal v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC29 Oct 2025WPSS/1770/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Alternative remedy / relegation to statutory forum; police departmental minor punishment of censure; appeal dismissed for delay; Rule 23 revision under U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991; U.P. Public Service (Tribunals) Act, 1976; maintainability preliminary objection by State counsel; liberty to approach available forum; Uttarakhand High Court WPSS service-side writ; single judge Manoj Kumar Tiwari; neutral citation 2025:UHC:9549; decided 29.10.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the statutory forum available to her in law; pending applications also stand disposed of. ¶4

Barkha Kanyal Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:UHC:9549

¶2

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS/1770/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Narayan Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State.
			2. Petitioner is serving as Sub-Inspector in
			Uttarakhand Police. Minor punishment of
			censure was given to her vide order dated 28.02.2024, passed by Senior Superintendent of Police, Almora. 3. Against said punishment, petitioner filed Appeal, which was dismissed on the ground of delay by Deputy Inspector General of Police,
			Kumaon Range, Nainital vide order dated 20.01.2025. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner
			has approached this Court, challenging punishment order, as well as order passed by the Appellate Authority. 4. Learned State Counsel raised preliminary objection that petitioner has statutory remedy of Revision under Rule 23 of U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, as applicable in State of Uttarakhand.
			5. He further submits that petitioner has also remedy of approaching the Tribunal, as per

¶3

2025:UHC:9549

¶4

provisions of U.P. Public Service (Tribunals)
Act, 1976.
6. Since petitioner has statutory remedies
against the orders impugned in this petition,
therefore, writ petition is disposed of with
liberty to petitioner to approach such forum, as
is available to her, in law.
7. Pending application (s), also stand
disposed of.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
29.10.2025
Mahinder/
MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.10.29 18:44:01 +05'30'

Barkha Kanyal v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Barkha Kanyal v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepvikram Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Deepanshu Sharma Vs State of Uttarakhand

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shankar Deep Vs State of Uttarakhand

Spark Educational and Medical Awareness Welfare Society Vs State of Uttarakhand

Dhanpal Vs State of Uttarakhand