26Th August vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 3480 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

26Th August vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 26 August, 2025

                                                         2025:UHC:7548-DB

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                AT NAINITAL

          THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR
                                 AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY


              WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 689 OF 2025


                             26TH AUGUST, 2025


Shahid Islam Khan                                ......          Petitioner


Versus


State of Uttarakhand & others                    ......         Respondents


Counsel for the petitioner        :       Mr.   Dushyant   Mainali,  learned
                                          counsel through video conferencing

Counsel for the respondents       :       Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tiwari, learned
                                          Standing Counsel for the State /
                                          respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 5

                                  :       Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel
                                          for   District  Level    Development
                                          Authority, Nainital / respondent Nos.
                                          3 and 4


The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar)

The learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 Mr.

Sandeep Kothari submits that pursuant to the previous

hearing, the authority has taken into consideration the

order of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in In Re:

Directions in Matter of Demolition of Structures, reported

in (2025) 5 SCC 1, and that the authority is in the process

2025:UHC:7548-DB of drawing up guidelines, and that two weeks' time is

required by the authority to draw up the guidelines and

thereafter the process would be initiated according to the

guidelines, and in the interregnum, the authority does not

intend to undertake any demolition activities.

2) In that view of the matter, the submission of learned

counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is placed on record,

and the writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.

3) In the event, the petitioner or anybody else, as

similarly situated, is aggrieved by any such order, it is

always open for them to approach this Court. All

contentions are left open.

4) The writ petition stands ordered accordingly.

5) There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________ G. NARENDAR, C.J.

_________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dt: 26TH AUGUST, 2025 Negi

HIMANS

2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf1 16e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d5757,

HU NEGI postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC51 A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18DB 2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.08.28 11:33:17 +05'30'