Lalman vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 370 UK

         HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                   Writ Petition (M/S) No. 391 of 2021
Lalman                                                      ......Petitioner
                                    Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others                              ....Respondents

Mr. Anand Kumar Pandey, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Narain Dutt, Brief Holder, for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos.1 to
4.
Mr. Kailash Chandra, Standing Counsel, for the State of U.P./respondent nos.5 to
8.

                                    JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

The petitioner seeks following relief:-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus. Commanding/directing the respondents to grant/sanction lease (patta) of gata no.23/34, admeasuring 0128 acres of land, situated at Village Khurpiya, Pargana Rudrapur, Tehsil Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar on usual charges in favour of petitioner, considering the fact that the petitioner is in possession over the said land since 1989, and also in view of report of 'Mangal Dev Bisharad Adyakasha, Uttar Pradesh Vyawastha Janch Samiti".

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus. Commanding/directing the respondents to decide the representation dated 05.08.2020 of the petitioner (Annexure No.3 to this writ petition) as expeditiously as possible, or within the stipulated time granted by this Hon'ble Court, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the present circumstances of the case."

2. At the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy has already been decided by this Court on 07.10.2020, passed in WPMS No.1788 of 2020 and WPMS No.1789 of 2020 and it is covered by that judgment. Learned Counsel for the State of U.P. admits this fact.

3. The writ petition is decided in terms of order dated 07.10.2020 passed in WPMS No.1788 of 2020 and WPMS No.1789 of 2020. Respondent no.6 is directed to decide the representation dated 05.08.2020 of the petitioner within a period of ten weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with the representation of the petitioner. While doing so the petitioner shall also be afforded the opportunity of hearing.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) Vacation Judge 19.02.2021 Nitesh