IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4743 OF 2001 (M/S) Sattar ………………………..Petitioner. Versus State of U.P. and others. ………….Respondents. Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Gopal Narain, Brief Holder for the respondent no. 2 & 3. None appears for rest of the respondents. 29th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Present writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.3.1993 and 7.9.1993 (Annexures 2 and 4 respectively) passed by the respondents no. 3 and 2 respectively. 2. In all fairness, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no possession over the land in dispute and the penalty imposed by the courts below may be set aside. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of Ram Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. through Advocate General and others 1987 A.W.C. 910. He also stated that when the petitioner did not claim possession, damages could not have been imposed on the petitioner in view of G.O. No. 2 8639/75-Sa-12-23-84/75 dated 10.9.1975 and Board’s order No. 11693/G-5-639/73 dated 22.1.1975. 4. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this case is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment and the Govt. Orders. Thus the penalty imposed by the courts below is set aside. 5. With the aforesaid observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 29.7.2008 Rathour