Narendra Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL THE HON'BLE CHI EF JUSTI CE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTI CE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (PIL) No.65 of 2026 20th May, 2026 Narendra Kumar

-----Petitioner

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others

----Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------- Pr esen ce:- Mr. Suresh Chandra Bhatt and Mr. Gaurav Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Amarendra Pratap Singh, learned Addl. Advocate General along with Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent nos.1 to 5. ----------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT : ( per Mr . Man oj Kum ar Gu pt a C. J.)

1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The present public interest litigation has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to stop the public road/ pathway over Khata – Khatauni No.00165 and Khasra No.11/ 1 of Block-Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar.

3.

The case of the petitioner is that the aforesaid land is recorded as Rasta in the revenue records and a public Rasta was in existence which is now being obstructed by the Forest Department.

4.

The Divisional Forest Officer, Tarai East Forest Divison, Haldwani has provided written instructions dated

11.05.2026 to the State Counsel wherein without specifying the plot number, it has been stated that the encroachments are being removed in pursuance to the

general directions issued in PIL No.22 of 2022. It is also stated that fencing work has been undertaken by the Forest Department in order to secure and protect the Government land from further encroachment and unauthorized use.

5.

It is further stated that an alternative motorable road already exists connecting the habitation area with the Pilibhit Highway. Therefore, public connectivity to the area has not been completely obstructed as alleged in the writ petition.

6.

As the instructions were not clear and no plot number was mentioned from which the encroachments were allegedly removed, therefore, we required, by our order dated 12.05.2026, the Standing Counsel to obtain instructions.

7.

In compliance of the said order, learned State Counsel has placed on record the instructions received from the Revenue Officers wherein it is admitted that Khasra No.11/ 1 is recorded as Rasta in the revenue records and it is being used as public Rasta.

8.

It is admitted that the said plot does not belong to Forest Department. It is stated that the Khasra No.11/ 2 area 0.095 hectare is recorded as Forest Reserve land in the revenue records and the Forest Department has

carried out fencing over its own land leaving aside the public Rasta.

9.

As there is clear admission that Khasra No.11/ 1 is a public Rasta, therefore, we dispose of the writ petition by providing that the public Rasta over Khasra No.11/ 1 shall not be obstructed in the garb of carrying out fencing of the forest land.

¶10Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

( MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)

( SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 20.05.2026 SS

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

2.5.4.20=71978f9c61bfdetiba69967c787b1764 ea7bc7dd129a8a6380d49b1885e628615, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=2D8B71B8D8E345F6B7F95B1DD 4FB4BEBD2B7D72C42261361AED33172F15214 8D, cn=SUKHBANT SINGH Date: 2026.05.21 09:56:55 +05'30'