IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1483 of 2007 Bhupendra Kumar Kukreti … Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand & others … Respondents Sri Tej Singh Bisht, holding brief of Sri Vinod Nautiyal, Advocate, for appellant Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for respondents no. 1 & 2 None for respondent no. 3. Dated: April 29, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this writ petition the petitioner has sought the relief in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.7.2007 as well as order dated 29.3.2007 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate (Executive Magistrate), Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal, as contained in Annexures-4 and 7 to the writ petition. Brief facts of the case, as per the petition, are that respondent no. 3 filed an application before Sub Divisional Magistrate (Executive Magistrate), Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal and complaint regarding the construction of house over the land by the petitioner. The Magistrate directed the Patwari concerned to submit the report and in compliance of direction issued by Magistrate the Patwari submitted his report. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 29.3.2007 issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. to remove the Bim or to appear and show cause on 10.4.2007. On 28.5.2007 the statement of the petitioner was 2 recorded. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate vide his order dated 18.7.2007 issued the notice under Section 142 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid both the impugned orders, the petitioner has preferred the petition before this Court. Heard Sri Tej Singh Bisht, holding brief of Sri Vinod Nautiyal, learned counsel for appellant, Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for respondents no. 1 & 2 and perused the record. None appeared for respondent no. 3. Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the entire material available before me, I am of the view that the impugned orders passed by the court below do not suffer from any illegality or irregularity and the same do not require any interference by this Court. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in limine. Stay order, if any, stands vacated. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP