UKHC010135032026 2026:UHC:7042 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2319/2026 Rajnish Mittal --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. M.C. Upadhyay, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, Additional CSC for the State/respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for respondent No. 4. Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, Advocate for respondent No. 5. Mr. Bhuwan Bhat, Advocate for respondent No. 6. 2. According to the petitioner, an examination centre is operating from a building, which is situate within residential area, which is causing traffic jam. 3. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel appearing for the MDDA, however, submits that as per Master Plan, the area in which the property in question is situate, is commercial area. He thus submits that if petitioner has any grievance, then he should approach the UKHC010135032026 2026:UHC:7042 appropriate authorities and not the MDDA. 4. This Court finds substance in the said contention. 5. If the area in which examination centre is being run, is earmarked as commercial area, in the Master Plan, then no direction can be issued to MDDA. 6. The writ petition is, however, disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the appropriate authority. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 10.08.2026 Mahinder