High Court · 2025

1. Mr. Suryakant Mait hani & Mr. Rishab Ranghar, Advocat es for t he pet it ioners. 2. Mr. S.K. Nainwal, learned St anding Counsel for t he St at e of Ut t arakhand. in bot h involved

3. Since com m on quest ions of fact and law are t he cases, t hese pet it ions are clubbed t herefore, t oget her and are being heard & decided t oget her. However, t he sake of brevit y and convenience, fact s of WPMS No. 2044 of 2025 alone are being considered. I n ( Evict ion Aut horit y t his pet it ion, pet it ioners have 4. challenged t he evict ion order passed by Prescribed Public Prem ises of Unaut horised Occupant s) Act , 1972 on 07.10.2019. They have also challenged t he j udgm ent rendered by learned Addit ional Dist rict 17.05.2025, Judge, Pit horagarh whereby t heir appeal was dism issed. I t is not in disput e t hat not ice under 5. Sect ion 4( 1) of t he Act was issued t o t he fat her of t he pet it ioners alleging t hat he has encroached upon Governm ent land. Fat her of in his reply in unaut horised cont ended occupat ion sufficient ly t im e, t herefore, he cannot be evict ed from t he propert y in quest ion. t he pet it ioner, t hat he public period

6. During pendency of proceedings before Prescribed Aut horit y, fat her of t he pet it ioners passed away and pet it ioners’ were subst it ut ed in his place. Prescribed Aut horit y passed evict ion order against pet it ioners, which was challenged by pet it ioners filed under in an appeal Sect ion 9 of t he Act . The appeal, having been dism issed by Addit ional Dist rict Judge, pet it ioners have approached t his Court . t hat From perusal of evict ion order 7. passed by Prescribed Aut horit y, revealed is cat egorised as 9( 3) ( M) Krishi Yogya Banj ar Bhoom i, which indicat es t hat it was a Governm ent Land. Thus, he subm it s t hat no one is aut horised t o occupy a Governm ent land, t herefore, Prescribed Aut hority was j ust ified in passing t he evict ion order. He subm it s t hat learned Appellat e Court has also considered all relevant aspect s and has affirm ed t he evict ion order. This Court finds subst ance in t he 8. subm ission m ade by learned St at e Counsel. Adm it t edly, t he land, over which is a is st anding, pet it ioners’ house t herefore, evict ion land, Governm ent Learned t hus Addit ional Dist rict j ust ified in dism issing t he appeal. Thus, t here is no scope for int erference wit h t he im pugned j udgm ent s and orders. fault ed. Judge was cannot Learned counsel for t he pet it ioners 9. t hen subm it s t hat pet it ioners belong t o weaker sect ion of t he societ y and as per Governm ent Policy, t here is a provision unaut horised occupat ion of such person. He subm it s labourer, t hat pet it ioners are wit hout any ot her propert y and t he only dwelling house of t he pet it ioners would regularisat ion landless be dem olished, if t he possession is not regularised.

10. Learned St at e Counsel subm it s t hat pet it ioners can apply for regularisat ion of t heir unaut horised possession, if t here is any provision of such regularisat ion. regularising I f pet it ioners m ake

11. The writ pet it ions are, accordingly disposed of wit h libert y t o pet it ioners t o m ake applicat ion( s) t o t he Com pet ent Aut horit y t heir unaut horised possession of t he land in quest ion. applicat ion( s) wit hin t hree weeks from t he Com pet ent Aut horit y shall t oday, t ake decision t hereupon wit hin nine m ont hs t hereaft er. For a period of t en t aken on t ill decision m ont hs or pet it ioners’ applicat ion, whichever earlier, dispossessed from t he land in quest ion. pet it ioners ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J)

11.07.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f 9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F 5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL