WPPIL/136/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 3330 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

                       SRI JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
                                      AND
                  SRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.

14th October, 2022 WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 136 OF 2022

Between:

Islam                                                        .......Petitioner

and

State of Uttarakhand and others.                           ....Respondents


Counsel for the petitioner        :   Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel
                                      assisted by Mr. Vinay Bhatt and Mr.
                                      Mohd. Shafy, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondents       :   Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned Deputy
                                      Advocate General for the State of

Uttarakhand/respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Mr. K.K. Harbola, proxy counsel for Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, learned counsel for respondent No. 6.

Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent No. 7.

Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for respondent No. 8.

Mr. Manish Lohani, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 9 & 10.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following

JUDGMENT : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)

The petitioner has preferred this petition, which is

the second petition, to seek a direction to the respondents

not to construct any road in the land of Qabristan in the

area of 1.5 hectare of Khasra No. 546 in Village Kargi Grant,

Tehsil Sadar, District Dehradun, which is bounded as under:

"East- Abadi, West-Pushta (retaining wall) and thereafter Nala (Bindal River), North-land of Government, South-Nala (Nala of Abadi)."

2. The case of the petitioner is that vide Government

Order dated 02.06.2016, the Government conveyed its

decision to make allotment of 1.5 Hectare of land for the

purpose of Graveyard. Further case of the petitioner is that

the Government, itself, has identified the land admeasuring

1.5 Hectare for the purpose of establishing the Graveyard,

has spent money, and has raised construction of the

boundary-wall on the said land. In this regard, the

petitioner has placed reliance on several documents filed

with the petition.

3. As noticed hereinabove, the petitioner had earlier

preferred Writ Petition (PIL) No. 29 of 2022 seeking the

same relief. That petition was dismissed as withdrawn with

liberty to file a fresh petition with complete particulars

disclosing the exact area of the land allotted for the

Graveyard and its exact location on 27.09.2022.

4. The Government Order dated 02.06.2016, relied

upon by the petitioner for the purpose of claiming the

allotment of land admeasuring 1.5 Hectare for the purpose

of Graveyard is completely silent about the exact parcel of

the land allotted for the purpose of the Graveyard. The said

Communication is only an in-principle approval or a decision

for making such an allotment. It also talks about allotment

of land for other purposes. However, there is nothing on

record to show that the parcel of land, which the petitioner

now claims to be the allotted land for the purpose of

Graveyard, was the actual parcel of land, which was decided

by the Government to be allotted for the said purpose, or

actually allotted for the said purpose.

5. It is also pertinent to note that there is no person

or authority in whose favour the allotment is claimed to

have been made.

6. The submission of Mr. Khan, learned Senior

Counsel for the petitioner, is that by the same Government

Order, a piece of land was allotted for the purpose of Colony

of drivers, who are constructing their colony, and it is they

who are creating a passage over the land of the Graveyard.

No other person has approached this Court claiming that the

land has been allotted for the purpose of developing a

residential colony of drivers. The facts of relating to

allotment of a particular piece of land in their favour are not

before us. Hence, it would not be appropriate for us to make

any comment in that regard.

7. In the light of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to

entertain the present writ petition. The same is,

accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to

approach the Civil Court to establish the factum of allotment

of the particular parcel of land for setting up the Graveyard,

and for claiming his rights.

________________ VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

_________________ MANOJ K. TIWARI, J.

Dt:14th October, 2022 Rathour