2025:UHC:5718-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPPIL/118/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. 1. Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Medha Pande, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tewari, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Mr. B.D. Pande, learned counsel for respondent no. 4. 4. Mr. Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no. 6. 5. Petitioner is a resident of Goriyaldhar, Nainagaon, Jeolikote, District Nainital. By means of this writ petition, he has sought the following relief:- (i) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to ascertain the real ownership of the disputed property. (ii) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to hand over the disputed property to the real owner, potentially to the respondent no. 4. 6. Mr. B.D. Pande, learned counsel for Municipal Board Ramnagar/respondent no. 4 submits that plot of Nazul land was leased out for 90 years in favour of forefathers of respondent no. 6 in the last Century; the term of lease has 2025:UHC:5718-DB expired and State Government has the right of re-entry over the said land, after expiry of the lease. He further submits that there is residential house standing over the said plot of land, which is still in possession of respondent no. 6. 7. Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, submits that respondent no. 5 is a tenant over a portion of the said house, however, he was forcibly dispossessed from the said house and an FIR was also registered regarding the incident. 8. Learned State Counsel submits that the lease deed executed in favour of forefathers of respondent no. 6 is not enclosed with the writ petition, therefore, he is not in a position to make any statement, as to whether term of the lease has expired or not. He further submits that the Competent Authority will examine, whether to exercise the right of re-entry over the land in question, if the lease is expired. 9. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for Municipal Board Ramnagar as well as learned State Counsel, no further order is needed. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by taking the statement made by learned counsel for the respondents on record. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 04.07.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea 30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A 58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.07.08 21:35:27 -07'00' 2025:UHC:5718-DB