2026:UHC:4578 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1700/2026 WPMS/1770/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Arvind Vashistha, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 3. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, Advocate for respondent no. 2. 4. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these petitions, therefore, they are being heard and decided together. However, for the sake of brevity and convenience, facts of WPMS No. 1700 of 2026 alone are being considered and discussed. 5. Petitioner has challenged order dated 25.05.2026, passed by Collector, Haridwar in Civil Revision No. 26/2024- 25. By the said order, matter was remanded back to the Assistant Collector, second Class for constituting a team of officers from Consolidation Department and Revenue Department for examining whether petitioner is in unauthorised occupation over any public land or not. 6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the Collector accepts in the impugned order that the matter is pending consideration before Consolidation Court, as such the matter could not have been relegated to 2026:UHC:4578 the Assistant Collector, Second Class that too by forming a committee. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submit that petitioner is in unauthorised occupation over Gram Sabha Land and proceedings were initiated against him under Section 122-B of Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, however, the Assistant Collector, Second Class dropped these proceedings; Gram Sabha challenged the order passed by Assistant Collector, Second Class before Collector and Collector has remanded the matter back to the Assistant Collector for deciding the matter afresh. 8. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, as the lis is yet to be decided and the impugned order does not attach finality to the dispute. 9. The writ petitions, are, accordingly dismissed. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that, if the land in question is public utility land, then it shall not be allotted to any other person and shall be used for public purpose only. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 09.06.2026 Navin