HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 309 of 2009 (M/S) Baba Daya Ram Dass .... Petitioner Versus The Prescribed Authority/D.F.O./ Prabhagiya Vanadhikari and another .... Respondents Mr. S.S. Negi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand 2nd March, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. The petitioner has filed a writ petition stating that he has received a notice under Section 61-A (1) of The Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Uttaranchal Amendment) (hereafter referred to as the ‘Act’) by the Prescribed Authority/D.F.O./Prabhagiya Vanadhikari, Narendra Nagar Van Prabhag, Muni ki Reti, District Tehri Garhwal. The petitioner although has filed reply to the said notice, no decision is being taken by the Prescribed Authority i.e. Divisional Forest Officer, Section 61-A (1) of the Act reads as follows: “61-A Summary eviction of unauthorized occupants – (1) If a Forest Officer, not below the rank of a Divisional Forest Officer, is of the opinion that any person is in unauthorised occupation of any land in areas constituted as a reserved or protected forest under section 20 or section 29, as the case may be, and that he should be evicted, the Forest Officer shall issue a notice in writing calling upon the person concerned to show cause, on or before such date as is specified in the notice, why an order of eviction should not be done.” The petitioner has admittedly received a notice by the Prescribed Authority. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that he will present in the office of the Prescribed Authority on 16th March, 2009. In case, the petitioner remains present on 16th March, 2009, the Prescribed Authority i.e. the Divisional Forest Officer shall pass an order under Section 61-A (1) of the Act as expeditiously as possible after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In case, the Prescribed Authority i.e. the Divisional Forest Officer comes to a conclusion that the petitioner is an unauthorized occupant, the law will take its own course and the petitioner will be liable to be evicted from the property in dispute. In case the Prescribed Authority has already taken an action under Section 61-A (1) of the Act, then o further action needs to be taken by the Prescribed Authority. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of finally. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 2.3.2009 Avneet