Inder Bhan and Others v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar 's or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

WPMB No. 527 of 2024 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, A.C.J. Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

¶1Mr. Pankaj Chaturvedi, learned counsel for petitioners, Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Ms. Rajni Supyal, learned Brief Holder for State of Uttarakhand and Mr. I.D. Paliwal, learned Standing Counsel for State of U.P.

¶2State of U.P. issued notice to the petitioners, asking them to vacate land belonging to Irrigation Department, which petitioners have allegedly encroached upon. Said notice was issued to petitioners in the month of November, 2023. Petitioners have challenged those notices in this writ petition after more than a year. The reliefs sought in the writ petition are as follows:- "1. A writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 28/29.11.2023 (Annexure-1) passed by the respondent no. 5.

¶2A writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no. 3/DM Champawat to demarcate the land of Ward No. 4, 5, of Nagar Panchayat Banbasa (Champawat) and give the opportunity of hearing to the petitioners also.

¶3To pass any other order or direction which this Court deems fit and proper.

¶4To award cost throughout."

¶3Learned counsel for petitioners contends that petitioners were not given any notice or opportunity of hearing and they were straightway called upon to vacate the land in question.

¶4Learned counsel for State of U.P., however, submits that in the writ petition, it is nowhere stated that petitioners have any right, title or interest over the subject land, nor any document has been enclosed to substantiate their claim for title. Thus, he submits that petitioners admit that they are encroachers upon public land. He further submits that writ petition has been filed after more than a year, which indicates that petitioners are fence-sitters and they have taken a chance by filing this writ petition, although they know that they don't have a case.

¶5Learned counsel for petitioners, however, submits that since petitioners are in possession over the land in question for several years, therefore, they are at least entitled to an opportunity of hearing.

¶6We, accordingly, dispose of the Writ Petition by providing that petitioners shall be at liberty to submit reply to the impugned notice by treating it to be a show-cause notice. Such reply shall be filed by petitioners within one week from today. Along with their reply, petitioners shall be at liberty to enclose all documents which support their claim regarding title.

¶7The Competent Authority in Irrigation and Water Resources Department, State of U.P. will consider the reply submitted by petitioners along with documentary evidence and pass an appropriate order within four weeks from the date of receipt of such document and, if anyone is found in

unauthorized occupation over public land, then necessary order for eviction shall be passed by Competent Authority within six weeks.

¶8For a period of six weeks, petitioners shall not be dispossessed.

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, A.C.J.)

04.12.2024

Mahinder/

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

2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a1 8b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1B C9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2024.12.05 10:58:29 +05'30'