23 February vs District Magistrate Haridwar & Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 1371 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

23 February vs District Magistrate Haridwar & Others on 23 February, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                           2026:UHC:1165



HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
       Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 389 of 2026
                        23 February, 2026


Galib & others

                                                           --Petitioners
                         Versus
District Magistrate Haridwar & others
                                                        --Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Avidit Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

By means of present writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities to immediately stop the illegal construction of drain over the private agricultural land of the petitioners.

(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities to remove the illegally constructed portion of the drain from the petitioners' land and restore the land to its original position.

(iii) Issue a writ order direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities to carry out drainage work strictly as per the original consolidation plan and revenue record over Khasra No.294 only.

(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to take suitable action on representation of petitioner within stipulated time."

2. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition on the premise that the respondent/State has constructed a drain over the agricultural land of the petitioner. The relief so sought by the petitioner can appropriately be pursued by availing a private law remedy before a competent civil court. Such a writ petition is not

2026:UHC:1165 maintainable before this Court. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in-limine.

3. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 23.02.2026 AK