2025:UHC:8393 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2728/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Anil Anthwal, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1 to 8. 3. Petitioner purchased a piece of land with building in Pachuwadoon, Tehsil Vikasnagar, District Dehradun in the year 2012. 4. According to petitioner, he is engaged in manufacture of medicines from the said property. On 23.09.2022, petitioner made a complaint to District Magistrate, Dehradun that certain persons are raising construction in the land adjoining the property of petitioner, which would result in blockage of the passage and deprive petitioner and members of general public of their right to use the passage. 5. The Additional District Magistrate, Dehradun passed an order on 23.09.2022 on petitioner’s application directing the Station House Officer, P.S. Selakui to immediately stop the construction work. Additional District Magistrate, Dehradun subsequently passed another order on 25.02.2025, addressed to Station House Officer, P.S. Selakui informing him that the earlier order passed on 23.09.2022 is being recalled. This order passed on 25.02.2025 is challenged by the 2025:UHC:8393 petitioner in this writ petition. 6. The impugned order is self explanatory. It refers to the enquiry report dated 01.03.2024 submitted by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Vikasnagar, in which it is mentioned that no part of khasra no. 1055 is recorded in Category- 4 in revenue records; the pillars, which were being erected are within the old construction and the passage, which leads to the industrial unit of the petitioner is not mentioned in the revenue map and the pillar, which were erected, do not affect the passage in any manner. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the passage in dispute is in fact the public road, maintained by State Public Works Department as such the District Magistrate is under a duty to remove encroachment from such public road. 8. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that the earlier order passed by Additional District Magistrate, Dehradun on 23.09.2022 is an administrative order, which is not referable to any statutory provision; there is a dispute between petitioner and his neighbours, who are respondent nos. 9, 10 & 11 in this writ petition, regarding a passage and such dispute cannot be resolved in a writ petition. He submits that petitioner has remedy under Section 133 Cr.P.C. (Section 152 BNSS) and he can also approach a civil court as per provisions of Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure. 9. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State 2025:UHC:8393 Counsel. 10. Since there is a civil dispute between petitioner and his neighbours regarding a passage, therefore, such civil dispute can only be resolved by a competent court of law, civil or revenue. The order passed by Additional District Magistrate on 23.09.2022 was without any authority of law, therefore, the Additional District Magistrate did the right thing by recalling the said order. 11. Thus, this Court do not find any reason to interfere in the matter. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner will make a representation to the District Magistrate. If he makes a representation, it shall be dealt with, as per law. 13. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 19.09.2025 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df0 06da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875 643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.09.20 11:41:22 +05'30'