Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9097 (UTT)

KULWANT SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/2205/2026 · 2026-07-29

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010128632026 2026:UHC:6561 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2205/2026 Kulwant Singh & Others --Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand & Others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Ms. Amreen Bano, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, Additional CSC, for the State. (2) By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs: “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quash the Impugned Notice dated: 10.04.2026 (Annexure No. 1) and Page No. 12 issued by the Tehsildar, Bajpur District Udham Singh Nagar. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to demarcate the land of the aforesaid petitioner Khata No. 122, Khasra No. 197/1 Area 0.148 and Khasra No. 197/3 Area 0.111 from the said land of Shamshan Ghat Khata No. 244, Khasra No. 196, Area 0.538 hectare which is Annexure No. 1 & 2 rspectively.” (3) Petitioners have challenged the notice dated 10.4.2026, issued by Tehsildar, Bajpur, which is on record as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is alleged in the notice that petitioners have encroached upon the land belonging to Shamshan to the extent of 300 square metre, therefore petitioners were asked to remove their encroachment within eight days, failing which legal action shall be taken against them. UKHC010128632026 2026:UHC:6561 (4) Learned State Counsel submits that encroachment made by petitioners has been removed on 5.5.2026. Thus he submits that the relief as claimed in prayer no. I do not survive. (5) As regards the second prayer, State Counsel submits that if petitioners want demarcation of their land, then they should move appropriate application before the competent authority under Section 41 of Land Revenue Act. (6) Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioners to move application under Section 41 of Land Revenue Act before the competent authority. If the alleged encroachment made by petitioners has not been removed so far, then it shall be open for the petitioners to give reply to the impugned notice to Tehsildar concerned within one week from today and Tehsildar shall take necessary action, as per law, within one week thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 29.7.2026 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=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6e ae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC 1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.07.29 17:39:15 +05'30' UKHC010128632026 2026:UHC:6561