IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1684 of 2007 (M/S) (Old CMWP No. 4250 of 1983) Shri Chatura Prasad Dimri, Son of Sri Narayan Dutt Dimri, Resident of village and P.O. Raiwala, Pargana Parwadoon, district Dehradun and another. …… Petitioners. Versus The State of U.P. and two others. … Respondents. Sri Sharad Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri B.K.Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents. Date August 22, 2008. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 12-1-1983 and dated 5-3-1983. Prayer has also been made to issue a writ of mandamus to command the respondents not to interfere with the rights of the petitioners over plot no. 144/1 situate in village Raiwala, Pargana Parwadoon, district Dehradun. According to the petitioners, by the impugned notice dated 5-3-1983 (Annexure No. 12), petitioners were informed by the Assistant Engineer that the land measuring 105 Acres belongs to Gaon Sabha and it was transferred by the Disrict Magistrate Dehradun vide letter No. 463/12-81-84 dated 26.2.1983 for rehabilitation work of the Irrigation Department and, according to the Assistant Engineer, the possession was handed over on 1-3- 1983 to Tehri Dam Division 26 Haridwar. The petitioners were also directed not to cultivate the land. 2 Vide Annexure 15, which is letter purporting to have been written by the Forest Department, the petitioners were directed not to make any cultivation over the land. According to the petitioners, the petitioners are in possession of the land prior to the enforcement of the U.P. Z.A. and L.R.Act. The landowner was one Sri Ghanshyam Giri and he executed a registered lease deed in favour of the petitioner on 2-6- 1950 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) and on the date of vesting, they acquired Sirdari rights and by operation of law, they further acquired Bhumidhari rights with transferable rights. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that after the date of vesting vide Annexure No. 8 which is Government Notification dated August 4, 1967, land measuring 111-48 Acres only of plot no. 144/1 of village Raiwala was declared reserved forest. Rest of the land, according to the petitioners, is still in their possession. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that there is no entry in favour of the petitioners in the revenue records and according to the respondents, the land belongs to the State Government. Without entering into the merits of the case and factual controversy as well as disputed questions of fact, by a perusal of aforesaid two letters, referred to above (Annexure No. 12 and 15), it reveals that these letters were written to the petitioners in administrative capacity and they do not disclose any cause of action and are liable to be quashed. 3 In the result, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned letters/notices Annexure No. 12 and annexure No. 15 are quashed. It is directed that the petitioners shall not be evicted by the respondents except by due course of law. The petitioners are given liberty to file a suit in the competent court of jurisdiction for recording their names on the basis of alleged old possession. The authority while deciding the question of title of the petitioners as well as the respondents shall not be influenced by the order of this Court. In the circumstances of the case, costs easy. ( B.S.Verma, J. ) RCP 4 5