WPPIL/38/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 1129 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL

                      SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
                                  AND
                       SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE, J.

6TH APRIL, 2022

WPPIL No. 38 OF 2022

Between:

Ram Narayan Yadav ...Petitioner.

and

State of Uttarakhand and others. ...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner. : Mr. Kaushal Sah Jagati, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following

JUDGMENT : (per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)

The petitioner by way of filing the present writ

petition has prayed for the following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to

direct the respondent no. 1 & 2 to conduct an

appropriate inquiry in the manner pertains to

illegality committed by the respondent no. 5 to 7 in

connivance with concerned officers of consolidation office, Kashipur and to take appropriate action

against the actual culprits, as prelaw.

(ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus

directing the respondent no.3 to correct the revenue

records in respect of land in question.

(iii) Issue respondent authorities to decide the

representation of the petitioner (Annexure-5).

(iv) Issue any other order or direction which this

Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the

circumstances of the case.

(v) Award cost of the petition."

2. It is borne out from the record that as per the

statement, in ceiling proceedings against Amar Singh and

others, notices were issued under Section 10(2) of the

Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling of Land Holdings Act,

1960. However, whether such a proceeding has come to

its logical conclusion, and final binding judgment has

been passed and there is no litigation pending in any

Court, including this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme

Court, is not mentioned anywhere in the petition.

3. In that view of the matter, we are of the

opinion that the present writ application is incomplete

and we cannot entertain the same for the reliefs prayed

for.

4. Hence, the present writ application is

dismissed.

5. In sequel thereto, the interim relief application

also stands disposed of.

6. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued to

the parties, as per Rules.

________________ S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.

____________ R.C. KHULBE, J.

Dt: 6th April, 2022 Rathour