UKHC010116062026 2026:UHC:5533 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2036/2026 Yashwant Singh --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Vinoda Nand Barthwal, Advocate for the petitioner through video conferencing. Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. S.K. Nailwal, Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner’s land was acquired for construction of road under District Plan. He earlier filed Writ Petition No. 3092 of 2025 (MS), which was disposed of with a direction to the Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, PWD, Pauri, to take decision on petitioner’s representation within 12 weeks. 3. Petitioner has now filed this writ petition with the contention that even though in terms of order passed in earlier writ petition, his representation was decided and he was also paid compensation amounting to Rs. 1,28,800/-; however, the amount paid as compensation, is grossly inadequate and petitioner is entitled to more amount as UKHC010116062026 2026:UHC:5533 compensation. 4. Reliefs sought in this writ petition are as follow: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the concerned respondents to release and pay full and fair compensation to the petitioner for his acquired land, along with all statutory benefits under the Right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement act 2013, within a stipulated time frame. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction appropriate in nature directing the respondent concerned to compensate precisely the petitioner and further to take necessary action against the erring person who is instrumental on the same. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction appropriate in nature directing the respondent concerned to compensate looking to future loss to the petitioners and further to take necessary action against the erring person who is instrumental on the same. 5. Learned State Counsel submits that this Court while exercising power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot determine the amount of compensation and there is a forum available to petitioner under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, therefore petitioner should approach appropriate forum available to him in law. 6. Mr. Vinoda Nand Barthwal, learned counsel appearing for petitioner do not UKHC010116062026 2026:UHC:5533 dispute the said submission and he concedes that petitioner has remedy under the aforesaid Act. 7. Having regard to the facts of the case, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the appropriate forum under aforesaid Act. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 08.07.2026 Mahinder/