2026:UHC:3352 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS No.1227 of 2026 Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Dushyant Mainali, learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. DCS Rawat, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India –respondent nos.1 to 3. 3. Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned Counsel for respondent no.4. 4. Mr. B.S. Koranga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand-respondent nos.5 and 6. 5. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the decision whereby direction for closure of Mall Road, Ranikhet, issued by Respondent No.3 (communicated via signboard, photograph of which is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition), has been issued. 6. It is the contention of petitioner that petitioner and his wife are medical practitioners and they are residing in a hundred years’ old house known as ‘Hermitage Building’ situated at Mall Road. The contention of petitioner is that petitioner and his wife, being the doctors, have to go off and on in the hospital on the medical call of their patients for which they are required to cross the Mall Road, Ranikhet, and by this Sign-Board which is under challenge, the free right of their ingress and egress is being affected. It is further stated by petitioner that petitioner also made a request to the Cantonment Board-respondent no.4 for opening of aforesaid Mall Road, Ranikhet for the petitioner and his wife; the Board by its recommendation dated 18.12.2025 has written to the Station Headquarters, Ranikhet to permit the petitioner and his wife to use the Mall Road, and not to stop them for commutation of their private vehicles, registration numbers whereof are given in recommendation letter dated 18.12.2025, but even then, petitioners are being restrained by respondent nos.1 to 3 for using the said road. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner is before this Court. 2026:UHC:3352 7. Mr. DCS Rawat, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Union of India has supplied instructions dated 03.05.2026 which are taken on record. On the strength of those instructions, he submits that the land on which the Mall Road is situated is A1 defence land, and the same is only for the use of military purposes, and it is not meant to be used for public purposes, and is also beyond the jurisdiction and control of Cantonment Board; and further, no representation has been received by respondent nos.1 to 3 allegedly sent by petitioner or his wife. At this, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the representation was sent by petitioner on 01.12.2025 through e-mail which was addressed to the Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board Office, Ranikhet, copy whereof was also addressed to respondent no.3. 8. However, respondent nos.1 to 3 denies the factum of submission of sending any representation allegedly sent by petitioner through e-mail to respondent no.3. 9. Be that as it may, if the dispute is only of sending of representation, petitioner is permitted by this Court to move a fresh representation straightway to respondent no.3 within one week from today. If such a representation is moved by petitioner, the same shall be considered by respondent no.3 strictly as per law within 15 days from the date of receipt of such representation. Needless to say that decision of the representation shall be made by respondent no.3 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. 10. This disposes of the writ petition finally. 11. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 04.05.2026 R.Dang