UKHC010121132026 2026:UHC:5784 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2108/2026 Satyendra Singh Sirohi and another --Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Chandel, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Nailwal, Standing Counsel for the State. 2. According to petitioners, a large tract of land has been declared surplus in proceedings under Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that since they are continuing in possession over a part of such land which has been declared surplus, therefore the land should be allotted to them. 3. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that Section 27 of aforesaid Act provides for settlement of surplus land. He submits that surplus land has to be settled in favour of landless agricultural labourer. He submits that a person, who claims to be in possession over land declared surplus, does UKHC010121132026 2026:UHC:5784 not have any preferential right of allotment and allotment has to be made strictly as per the categories provided in Section 198 of Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have made representation and District Magistrate be asked to take decision thereupon. 5. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that District Magistrate cannot take any decision contrary to the provisions of Section 198 of Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and reliefs as claimed by petitioners cannot be granted. 6. The writ petition, however, is disposed of with direction to District Magistrate to follow the Scheme of Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act and also relevant provision contained in Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, while making allotment of the land declared surplus. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 14.07.2026 Mahinder/