WPMS/927/2026
2026 Latest Caselaw 3054 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/927/2026 on 16 April, 2026

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                                      2026:UHC:2716
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               WPMS/927/2026
                               Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Petitioner is resident of village Mohammadpur Bujurg, Laksar, District Haridwar. By means of this writ petition, he has sought the following reliefs:

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to disturb or alter the Kurra/Chak land allotted to the petitioner pursuant to consolidation proceedings concluded in 2023-24 in Village Mohammadpur Bujurg, Laksar District Haridwar.

II. Issue a writ, order or direction that any proceedings undertaken pursuant to the representation of Gram Pradhan Mahipal Singh shall be confined only to the specific land, if any, found to be public utility land, and shall not affect lawful allotments of petitioner."

3. Learned State Counsel submits that earlier, another person belonging to same village filed Writ Petition No. 3045 of 2025 (MS), which was disposed of with liberty to petitioner in that case to make representation to the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, who was directed to take decision on the representation within one year.

4. He submits that petitioner now apprehends that his possession over the land situate in 2026:UHC:2716 village Mohammadpur, Bujrug may be disturbed during consolidation.

5. Learned State Counsel submits that writ petition is based on apprehension; this Court in its earlier order dated 31.10.2025 has provided that opportunity of hearing shall be given to all persons who are likely to be affected by the decision taken by Settlement Officer, Consolidation.

6. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel. Since in the earlier order it has been provided that all persons who are likely to be affected, have to be given opportunity of hearing, thus apprehension expressed by petitioner that his possession is going to be disturbed without hearing him, is unfounded.

7. The writ petition is without any cause of action, therefore, same is dismissed.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 16.04.2026 Mahinder/

MAHINDER

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF

2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a9

SINGH 2d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D30 5B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2026.04.16 17:52:08 +05'30'