Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8016 (UTT)

ASHOK KUMAR TIWARI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/2059/2026 · 2026-07-10

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010117962026 2026:UHC:5663 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2059/2026 Ashok Kumar Tiwari --Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Deepak Petshali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, Additional CSC with Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Reliefs sought by petitioners in this petition are as follow: “1) Issue a Writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith undertake and complete the rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to the petitioner in accordance with the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. II) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to restraining the respondents from taking any coercive action, dispossessing the petitioner or causing further demolition till final adjudication of the petitioner's rehabilitation claim. III) Issue a writ order or direction commanding the respondents to decide the petitioner's pending proceedings under Section 64 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 by a reasoned and speaking order within a time bound period (ANNEXURE No.2) Pg No. 15-22.” 3. Learned State Counsel submits that if petitioner makes representation to the UKHC010117962026 2026:UHC:5663 District Magistrate, the same shall be considered, as per law, at the earliest. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation. If he makes representation within two weeks from today, decision thereupon shall be taken by District Magistrate concerned, as per law, within three months thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 10.07.2026 Mahinder/