2026:UHC:459 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 134 of 2026 10 January, 2026 Harpal Singh --Petitioner Versus Assistant Collector First Division Pargana Adhikari, Kichha 2: State Of Uttarakhand 3: Gram Sabha Dopahariya 4: Uttarakhand Shehri Kshetra Vikas Agency --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Mayank Singh, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr. K.S. Mehta, learned Additional C.S.C. with Mr. Sudhir K. Nailwal, learned Standing Counsel and Mr. Bhupendra Koranga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent Nos.1 and 2. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for respondent No.3- Gram Sabha. Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner for the following reliefs:- i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directing the Court of Assistant Collector (First Division)/Pargana Adhikari Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar to expedite the trial of the pending suit filed under Sections 229 B and 229 D of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. ii) Pass an appropriate direction to ensure that the said suit is taken up on a day to day basis and to stay the encroachment of the land which is the subject matter of the said suit keeping in view the construction activity on the said land is ongoing during the pendency of the suit, thereby seriously prejudicing the rights of the petitioner. 2. A Revenue Suit No.22/06 of 2023-24 was instituted by the petitioner against respondent-State and Gram Sabha under Section 229 B of the U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). In the said revenue suit, an application for temporary injunction under Section 229D of the Act has also been enclosed. 2026:UHC:459 2 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the matter is being adjourned for one reason and another, mostly due to the absence of the Presiding Officer of the learned Trial Court and the interim relief application i.e. temporary injunction application could not have been proceeded. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that so far no objection has been filed by the respondents on the temporary injunction application. The Suit was filed in the year 2023-24, and therefore, a prejudice is being caused to the petitioner by non-disposal of the temporary injunction application. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record of the case as well as the order sheet annexed by learned counsel for petitioner, this Court feels that the argument advanced by learned counsel for petitioner holds some water and needs interference by this Court. The application under Section 229D of the Act is filed along with the Suit and as yet, no objection has been called by learned Trial Court. 6. In such view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to learned Trial Court i.e. Assistant Collector (First Class)/SDM, Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar, to decide the application under Section 229-D of the Act for temporary injunction within 60 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order after calling objection to the said application from respondents within 15 days. 7. Pending application(s) stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.01.2026 PN