UKHC010123442026 2026:UHC:6073 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2140/2026 Smt. Naseem --Petitioner Versus Joint Chief Administrator and others --Respondents Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for respondent no. 1. 3. Ms. Ananya Jain, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. 4. A demolition order was passed against petitioner by District Level Development Authority, Nainital. Petitioner challenged that order in Appeal, which, however was dismissed. Petitioner, thereafter filed revision, which too has been dismissed vide order dated 29.04.2026. 5. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- “i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 29-4-2026, 09-01- 2025 & 08-05-2023, passed by respondent no. 1, 2 & 3 respectively (page no. 42, 43, 53 to 56 & 62 to 69 annexure no. 5, 9 & 11 respectively). ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 not to proceed further in pursuance of letter dated 26-5-2026 (Page No. 70 Annexure No. 12). iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to immediately de seal the residential area of the petitioner.” 6. Petitioner had contended on the last occasion that the revision was decided by Joint Chief Administrator; while the competent authority to take decision on the revision petition UKHC010123442026 2026:UHC:6073 is Chief Administrator, Uttarakhand Housing and Urban Development Authority. 7. Time was given to learned counsel appearing for the Development Authority to get instructions on the said aspect. Today, he has produced in Court a notification dated 11.08.2022, issued by Chief Administrator, whereby power to decide revision under Section 7(B) (4) of Uttarakhand Urban and Country Planning and Development Act, 1973 was delegated to Additional Chief Administrator and Joint Chief Administrator. 8. In view of the said fact, learned counsel for petitioner submits that he do not want to press the prayer, as made in relief clause-i. He submits that petitioner may be permitted to submit compounding map and the competent authority in Development Authority be asked to take decision thereupon expeditiously. 9. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 submits that he has no objection if the writ petition is disposed of in terms of prayer made by petitioner’s counsel. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to submit compounding application along with compounding map. If she files such application within ten days from today, Vice Chairman, DLDA, Nainital shall consider petitioner’s prayer and pass appropriate order, as per law, within eight weeks thereafter. For a period of ten weeks or till decision is taken on petitioner’s compounding application, whichever is earlier, status quo as on toady qua the building in question shall be maintained. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 20.07.2026 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e 4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D0 95C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.07.21 09:58:52 +05'30'