9 March vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 2168 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

9 March vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors on 19 March, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                       2026:UHC:1924



HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
       Writ Petition Misc. Single No.1966 of 2024
                         19 March, 2026
Rajendra Prasad Kabtiyal                                 --Petitioner
                               Versus
State Of Uttarakhand and Ors.                       --Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
    Mr. Himanshu Aswal, learned counsel holding brief of
    Mr. Navnish Negi, learned counsel for petitioner.
    Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned D.A.G. for the State of
    Uttarakhand/respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5.
    Mr. Harsh Vardhan Dhanik, learned counsel for
    respondent Nos.2 and 3.
    Mr. Ravindra Singh Garia and Mr. D.S. Mehta, learned
    counsel for respondent No.6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 18.05.2024 passed by respondent No.2, whereby, authorities of the State Government were directed to remove the illegal possession of the petitioner over the land belonging to respondent No.6.

2. Petitioner has come up in the present writ petition saying that the Uttarakhand Scheduled Caste Commission is a recommendatory Body and it cannot pass such a positive order to remove the possession of petitioner from the land belonging to respondent No.6, who undisputedly belongs to schedule caste.

3. It is contended by petitioner that Commission has exceeded its jurisdiction by directing such order instead of making recommendation for that to State Authority.

2026:UHC:1924

4. Counter affidavits have been filed by the respondents.

5. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3, it has been specifically mentioned by Commission that the Commission had collected evidences with regard to the alleged illegal possession of petitioner over the property of respondent No.6, and therefore, it has passed such direction. However, it is admitted to the Commission that it can only made recommendation for an action against the petitioner for his eviction from the land, but, a positive order cannot be passed by the Commission to direct the State Government to evict the petitioner.

6. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that Commission has exceeded its jurisdiction as it can only recommend for action against the petitioner for his eviction from the land of respondent No.6 and cannot pass any positive order for the same. Thus, the present writ petition deserves to be allowed.

7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 18.05.2024 passed by respondent No.2-Chairman Uttarakhand Scheduled Caste Commission is hereby quashed. However, parties are at liberty to avail the remedy available to them under the Private Law Remedy.

8. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 19.03.2026 PN