GIRISH PRASAD RATURI AND ORS v. DIRECTOR REHABILIATION DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
WPMS/1056/2025 · 2026-01-02
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 980 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 980 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:39 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/1056/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
1. None present for the petitioner.
2. Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-
(i) To issue a writ, rule, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant separate entitlement status to the petitioners under the 1998 Rehabilitation Policy, as the father of the petitioners, Late Sh. Jagdish Prasad, had passed away prior to the issuance of Section 4 notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and as per the policy, the legal heirs are entitled to separate entitlement and rehabilitation benefits, till the disposal of the writ petition keeping in view the facts highlighted in the body of the petition.
(ii) To issue writ, rule of direction to Quash the illegal and arbitrary action of the respondents, whereby the petitioners have been jointly considered as one displaced family, and further direct the respondents to allow separate plots/land to each petitioner as per their individual entitlement under the 1998 Rehabilitation Policy, till the disposal of the writ petition keeping in view the facts highlighted in the body of the petition.
4. Today the matter is listed on a withdrawal application. In para 4 of the said application, it is stated that the Rehabilitation Directorate has passed an
order on 03.09.2025, whereby it is provided that petitioner will be granted
2026:UHC:39 separate eligibility under the Rehabilitation Policy, 1998. In para 5 of the withdrawal application, it is mentioned that in view of order passed by Rehabilitation Directorate, the grievance raised by petitioner, no more survives.
5. For the reasons indicated in the withdrawal application, the writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
02.01.2026 Aswal
NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802 a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C2 2DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2026.01.02 03:15:17 -08'00'