20 March vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 2192 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

20 March vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 20 March, 2026

                                                          2026:UHC:1962-DB
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
                                  AND
   THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY
                  Writ Petition (PIL) No.5 of 2026
                              20 March, 2026

  Bhuwan Chandra Pokhariya                                -----Petitioner

                                  Versus

  State of Uttarakhand and Others                       ----Respondents
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Presence:-
  Mr. Bhuwan Chandra Pokhariya, petitioner-in-person.
  Mr. Puran Singh Bisht, learned Chief Standing Counsel along with Mr.
  Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, learned Brief Holder for the State of
  Uttarakhand.
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
  JUDGMENT :

(per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.)

1. Heard the petitioner-in-person and learned

State Counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed praying

for the following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondent State authorities to forthwith implement and give full effect to the Chief Minister's Notification dated 24.02.2009, along with all consequential governmental approvals and departmental communications, by conferring ownership rights and declaring eligible forest settlements as revenue villages, strictly in accordance with law and within a time-bound manner as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;

(ii) Direct the respondent authorities to place before this Hon'ble Court the entire original records, files, notings and correspondence relating to the issuance, processing and non-

implementation of the Chief Minister's Notification dated 24.02.2009, including inter- departmental communications between the Revenue Department and the Forest

2026:UHC:1962-DB Department, so as to enable this Hon'ble Court to examine the reasons for prolonged inaction spanning more than two decades:

(iii) Issue appropriate directions fixing administrative accountability upon the officers and authorities responsible for the deliberate delay, suppression and non-implementation of a binding executive decision, and to take such corrective and remedial measures as may be deemed fit to prevent recurrence of such administrative paralysis in matters affecting fundamental and human rights of marginalised communities,

(iv) Issue such further directions as may be necessary to ensure that the affected forest-

dwelling communities are not subjected to eviction, harassment or coercive action during the pendency of the implementation process, and that their right to residence, livelihood and dignity is protected in the interim;"

3. The contention of the petitioner is that the Chief

Minister on 21.02.2009 made a public declaration that

certain land of the Forest Department falling under

Vidhansabha constituency Haldwani would be declared as

revenue village. Similar declaration was again made by

him in subsequent years. The same were duly

communicated to the concerned departments also.

4. On 04.11.2010, Additional Secretary, Revenue

Department, Government of Uttarakhand addressed a

communication in reference to the said declaration to the

Additional Secretary, Chief Minister Secretariat. It is

further submitted that the matter was also discussed in

Vidhansabha but till date the area has not been declared

as revenue village.

2026:UHC:1962-DB

5. Learned State Counsel has invited our attention

towards notification no.104/XVIII(1)/2013-9(7)/2009

dated 31.05.2013 which states that the Union

Government by order dated 04.12.2006 has imposed a

ban on conversion of forest land to revenue villages in

Districts Nainital, Udham Singh Nagar and Champawat in

the State of Uttarakhand and, therefore, the declaration

made by the Chief Minister would stand rescinded. He

submits that as Union Government has imposed ban on

conversion of forest land into revenue villages in Districts

Nainital, Udham Singh Nagar and Champawat, therefore,

the declaration made by the Chief Minister could not be

given effect to.

6. The petitioner in reply, has placed reliance on

certain office notings obtained under the Right to

Information Act filed as Annexure-5 wherein it is stated

that certain forest land of village Tehri Bandrakoti and

Tehri Vikasnagar has been given the status of revenue

villages.

7. The ban imposed by Union Government by order

dated 04.12.2006 is in respect of the forest land of District

Nainital, Udham Singh Nagar and Champawat and not

District Haridwar and Tehri. The petitioner, therefore,

cannot be given any benefit of the fact that certain land of

villages falling in District Haridwar and Tehri has been

declared as revenue villages. The declaration made by the

2026:UHC:1962-DB Chief Minister on which reliance has been placed evidently

has not been implemented, in view of the ban imposed by

the Central Government.

8. As there is no material before us that the

aforesaid ban in respect of any land falling under District

Nainital has been withdrawn, therefore, the relief prayed

for in the writ petition cannot be granted.

9. Thus, the writ petition fails and is, accordingly,

disposed of.

10. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed

of.

(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)

(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 20.03.2026 SS

SUKHBANT Digitally signed by SUKHBANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=71978f9c61bfde0ba69967c787b1764ea7bc7dd129a8a6

SINGH 380d49b1885e628615, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=2D8B71B8D8E345F6B7F95B1DD4FB4BEBD2B7D7 2C42261361AED33172F152148D, cn=SUKHBANT SINGH Date: 2026.03.20 17:16:19 +05'30'