Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 6001 UK
Judgement Date : 10 December, 2025
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings or
SL.
Date directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
WPMS No.2680 of 2025
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel with Mr. Devendra Singh, learned counsel for petitioner.
2. Mr. K.S. Mehta, learned Additional C.S.C. with Mr. Sudhir Kumar Nailwal, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent Nos.1 to 3.
3. By means of present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has put to challenge the judgment and order dated 22.01.2025 passed in Second Appeal No.165 of 2016- 17 M/s. Ski & Snow Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Uttarakhand through Tehsildar and Others, under Section 331 of UPZA & LR Act, by the learned Board of Revenue, Dehradun, as well as the decision dated 29.05.2015 (Annexure No.1) passed in Case No.86 of 2013-14 (Old No.06/2007-
08) State Vs. Sri Vijay Singh Pal and Ors., under Section 166 & 167 of UPZA & LR Act by learned Assistant Collector First Class/SDM, Joshimath, District Chamoli, and further other ancillary reliefs.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by committing fraud with the petitioner as well as the State, respondent Nos.4 and 5 jointly misused the land belongs to scheduled caste category person to earn money by illegal and arbitrary means against the provisions of UPZA & LR Act and therefore, the land in question is liable to be vested with the State.
5. He further submits that the impugned decisions passed by learned Assistant Collector First Class/SDM, Joshimath and the learned Board of Revenue, are wholly illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eyes of law.
6. Issue notice to respondent Nos.4 & 5, returnable within four weeks.
7. Steps to be taken within a week.
8. Learned State Counsel prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit.
9. Put up on 13.02.2026.
10. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that in order to protect the land in question, which is ultimately appears to be belonging to the State after vesting, no third party interest shall be created by respondent No.4, till the next date of listing.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.12.2025 PN
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!