2026:UHC:2012 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No.107 of 2026 20th March, 2026 Shashi Manchanda and another ………….Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Rishabh Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no.1. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 to 5. Mr. Nikhil Singhal, learned counsel for respondent nos.6 and 7, through video conferencing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby the petitioners have sought a direction in the nature of mandamus seeking further proceedings as per law on report dated 12.12.2024 and show cause notice order for stopping all construction and police complaint all evenly dated 16.12.2024. 2. It transpires that the dispute between the petitioners and the respondent nos.6 and 7 is with regard to certain construction having been raised by respondent nos.6 and 7 which the petitioners claims to be constructed against the sanctioned map. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-H.R.D.A. submits that on compounding applications moved by the private respondents, the compoundable portion of the illegal construction which was raised beyond sanctioned map was compounded and the portion which could not be compounded, for that private respondents were directed to demolish that portion. 1 2026:UHC:2012 4. It is also informed that aggrieved by the aforesaid compounding orders dated 12.01.2026 and 22.02.2026 the private respondents have filed appeals under Section 57 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which is pending adjudication before the learned Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Pauri-Garhwal. 5. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent-H.R.D.A. nothing is left to be decided by this Court when an appeal is pending before the Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Pauri-Garhwal. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of, and it is provided that the petitioners may move an application, for impleadment in those appeals, if permitted under the law, and shall be decided by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law. 7. It is also informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority since 2025-26. 8. The Appellate Authority is directed to decide the appeals filed by respondent nos.6 and 7 within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 20.03.2026 SK 2