IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (P.I.L.) No. 988 of 2008 (M/B) Everest Educational & Social Welfare Trust 33 / 94, Sher Kothi Mission Compound, 1, Civil Line, Roorkee (Uttarakhand) through its Secretary Dr. Galib Hussain. [ . Petitioner ...………… [ Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Principal Secretary Revenue Civil Secretariat, Dehradun. 2. Commissioner Garhwal Mandal Camp Office, Dehradun. 3. District Magistrate, Haridwar. 4. Prescribed Authority / S.D.M. Roorkee, District Haridwar. 5. Sagar Hotel, Haridwar Road, Roorkee, District Haridwar Through its Managing Partner 6. Pashant Goel, S/o Sri Ram Goel R/o 34, Civil Lines, Roorkee. 7. Smt. Anita Goel W/o Shri Prashant Goel R/o 34, Civil Lines, Roorkee. ...…………. Respondents Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2) By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding respondents No. 1 to 4 to initiate appropriate action against respondents No. 5 to 7, in accordance with law. 3) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is a Trust has filed this public interest litigation, alleging that a hotel and shopping complex is being constructed illegally by respondents No. 6 and 7 over a nazul land. Perusal of the order dated 05.09.2008, passed by respondent No. 4 Prescribed Authority / Sub Divisional Magistrate, Roorkee, in Case No. 8 / 2007– 08 shows that the Junior Engineer of the Regulated Area, Roorkee, made a challani report on 17.10.2007, relating to the disputed constructions on which notices were issued to the concerned respondents. After hearing the parties, respondent No. 4 has already directed that the illegal constructions be demolished. Said order has been passed under Section 10(1)(2) of the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of Building Operations) Act, 1958. Since, the authorities concerned are already taking appropriate action, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter. 4) The writ petition is dismissed in limine. (Interim Relief Application No. 8330 of 2008 also stands dismissed, accordingly). (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 11.12.2008 11.12.2008 H.Negi