Mohd. Ajeez And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 1266 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Mohd. Ajeez And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 22 July, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

  HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                 Writ Petition No. 2144 of 2025 (M/S)

 Mohd. Ajeez and Others                                    ........Petitioners

                                     Versus

 State of Uttarakhand and Others                          ........Respondents

 Present:-
        Mr. Prem Kaushal, Advocate for the petitioners.
        Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State.


                                    JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to the notice dated

11.07.2025, issued by the respondent no.4/Jiledar, Irrigation Division,

Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the petitioners have

been required to remove encroachment or else they will be forcibly

evicted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is

no such law to dispossess the petitioners from their place, where they

have been staying since past 50 years; the petitioners were about to be

given lease of the land on which they are in possession.

4. Yesterday, the Court wanted to know from learned State

Counsel as to under what provision of law, such notice could be given?

Today, learned State Counsel submits that earlier also the petitioners

were given notices to remove the encroachment. Now, the notice has

been given under Section 441 IPC and under the provisions of the

Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 ("the

Act"). He submits that while quashing the notice, the respondents-

authority may be given liberty to proceed against the petitioners in

accordance with law. He has placed for the perusal of the Court the

written instructions. Let it be taken on record.

5. The notice does not reveal that it is issued under the

provisions of the Act. It is not clear as to under what provisions of law,

the impugned notice has been issued. There is no determination of the

rights of the parties. Does any law permit such eviction? It is also not

shown in the instant case. Therefore, this Court is of the view that

while quashing the impugned notice, the respondents-authority may

be given liberty to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with

law. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

6. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned notice dated

11.07.2025 is quashed.

7. However, the respondents-authority shall be at liberty to

proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law.

(Ravindra Maithani, J) 22.07.2025 Ravi Bisht