Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7364 (UTT)

SUSHIL KUMAR v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

WPMS/1928/2026 · 2026-06-30

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010108512026 2026:UHC:5163 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1928/2026 Sushil Kumar --Petitioner Versus District Magistrate Udham Singh Nagar --Respondent Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. M.K. Ray, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. V.D. Bisen, Additional CSC, for the State. Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent no. 2 and 3. (2) Petitioners earlier filed Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1396 of 2026 challenging the separate notices issued to them by the Estate Officer, Farm, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology on 10.4.2026. By those notices, petitioners were asked to remove their encroachment from the land belonging to University within 15 days. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 19.5.2026, directing the Estate Officer, Farm to consider the reply/representation submitted by petitioners and pass reasoned order, as per law, within six weeks. (3) In this writ petition, petitioners have challenged fresh notices, issued to them by the Estate Officer, Farm on 4.6.2026. It is contended that the detailed reply/representation submitted by petitioners, with supporting documents, was not considered and, instead of passing a reasoned order, as directed, Estate Officer, Farm has again issued fresh notices, which are in teeth UKHC010108512026 2026:UHC:5163 of the order passed by this Court. (4) Learned Counsel appearing for the University concedes that impugned notices are not as per the directions issued by this Court. He submits that he has instructions to state that University is withdrawing the impugned notices, reserving liberty to pass fresh reasoned order, as per law, after considering the reply/representation submitted by petitioners. He further submits that fresh order would be passed within four weeks and he gives an undertaking that till passing of fresh order, no coercive action shall be taken against petitioners, on the strength of impugned notices. (5) Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to competent authority in the University to pass fresh order in respect of each of the petitioners, after considering their reply/representation and the documents enclosed therewith. For a period of four weeks or till the reasoned order is passed in the matter, petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the land in question. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 30.6.2026 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e6 1af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB5 88052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.06.30 17:22:05 +05'30' UKHC010108512026 2026:UHC:5163