[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
2 December vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors on 2 December, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:10717
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 3170 of 2025
02 December, 2025
Ramesh and Ors. --Petitioners
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand and Ors. --Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Ms. Sadaf, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. K.S. Mehta, learned Additional C.S.C. with
Mr. Sudhir Kumar Nailwal, learned Standing
Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent
No.1.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
The present writ petition is not properly
worded. The unnecessary challenge has been thrown by
the petitioners against the judgment and order dated
08.07.2019 passed by learned Second Consolidation
Officer, Roorkee, District Haridwar, in Case No.164
Krishan Dutt Vs. State, as well as the judgment and
order dated 16.01.2023 passed by learned Settlement
Officer Consolidation, Roorkee, District Haridwar in
Consolidation Appeal No.74 of 2019 Somprakash and
Anr. Vs. Anuj and Ors., which are still subject matter of
Consolidation Revision No.71 of 2022-23 Somprakash
and Anr. Vs. Anuj and Ors., pending in the Court of
learned Deputy Director Consolidation/District
Magistrate, Haridwar. Thus, the prayer No.(I) is not
maintainable before this Court.
2. Second prayer sought by petitioners in the
present writ petition is for a direction to private
2025:UHC:10717
respondents to maintain status quo and furthermore
not to create any third party interest and to change the
nature of the property during pendency of revision
preferred by the petitioners.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the
petitioner that in Consolidation Revision No.71 of
2022-23 Somprakash and Anr. Vs. Anuj and Ors.,
pending before learned Deputy Director Consolidation/
District Magistrate, Haridwar, an application has been
moved by the petitioners on 24.10.2025 stating therein
that the private respondents are raising construction
over the property in dispute, and therefore, a prayer
has been made to pass an order of status-quo so far as
the possession and the nature of suit property in
dispute.
4. It is further contended by her that the
notices were issued to private respondents on this
application and on the consolidation revision and the
next date fixed in the matter is 20.12.2025. The
grievance of the petitioners is that despite pendency of
the revision, private respondents are raising
construction over the suit property and in proof,
learned counsel for petitioners has annexed the
photograph of construction as Annexure No.3,
wherefrom, it is reflected that some wall is constructed
allegedly by the private respondents.
5. In such view of the matter, only this
direction can be issued by this Court to learned
Deputy Director of Consolidation/District Magistrate,
Haridwar, to decide the application dated 24.10.2025
expeditiously.
2025:UHC:10717
6. Accordingly, the learned Deputy Director of
Consolidation/District Magistrate, Haridwar, is
directed to decide the application dated 24.10.2025
moved by the petitioners in Consolidation Revision
No.71 of 2022-23 Somprakash and Anr. Vs. Anuj and
Ors., expeditiously but not later than 15 days from
today, after putting the private respondents on notice.
7. In view of the above, the present writ petition
is disposed of.
8. Pending application(s), if any, stands
disposed of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
02.12.2025
PN
