2025:UHC:4813-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 310 OF 2025 11TH JUNE, 2025 Sushil Kumar Aswal …… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others …… Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Suryakant Maithani, learned counsel Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Sunil Khera, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State / respondents The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent-State. 2) The petition is directed against the order of the Appellate Authority / Conservator of Forest, Shivalik Circle, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, in Appeal No. 02 of 2020. 3) It is the case of the petitioner that he had made an application under Section 122 of the U.P.Z.A & L.R. Act to the extent of 0.0300 Hectares, and that subsequently the officials of the forest department issued notice to him 1 2025:UHC:4813-DB stating that the land over which he had put up a tin shed and a permanent structure was part of Rajpur compartment No. 8 of Raipur Range of Mussoorie Forest Division, and that the same is a reserved forest. 4) The Appellate Authority during the course of hearing has also further directed a joint survey of the revenue department and the forest department officers which came to be held on 03.10.2024, and the joint survey affirmed the stand of the forest department that the land was part of Rajpur compartment No. 8, Raipur Range of Mussoorie Forest Division, which is a reserved forest. In that view of the matter, the Appellate Authority was pleased to hold that the petitioner has illegally occupied part of the reserved forest, and that the order of eviction issued under Section 61A(2) of the Indian Forest Act (Uttaranchal Amendment) Act, 2001, was fully justified. 5) The petitioner is unable to place on record any material which would in any manner cast a cloud on the joint survey proceedings carried out both by the revenue department and the forest department on 03.10.2024. 6) In that view of the matter, and in view of the fact that the revenue authorities, who had granted the land having not raised an objection to the survey report, we do not find any ground to entertain the writ petition. Be that as it may, 2 2025:UHC:4813-DB it is needless to state that it is always open to the petitioner to approach the revenue authorities for identification of the land granted to him under the application made under Section 122 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. 7) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already submitted an application under Section 41 of the Land Revenue Act. The revenue department shall expedite the consideration of disposal of the application within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8) Writ petition stands ordered accordingly. 9) There shall be no order as to costs. 10) As a sequel thereto, pending application, if any, shall stand closed. ________________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. ____________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 11TH JUNE, 2025 Negi 3 HIMANS HU NEGI Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13 aaf116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90 d5757, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990F C51A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF 7C18DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.06.16 10:58:45 +05'30'