IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 6029 of 2001 (M/S) (Old CMWP No. 30749 of 1992) Balwant Singh and nine others. …… Petitioners. Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Sri Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondent nos. 1-3. None is present for the private respondents. Date September 16, 2008. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Admit the writ petition. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the objections of the petitioners under Section 11(2) of the Act. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to allot the land to any one during the pendency of the objections of the petitioners before the Prescribed Authority; (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to physically dispossess the petitioners; (iv) Issue any other and further suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of writ as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; and (v) Award cost of this petition to the humble petitioners. 2 At the outset, it may be mentioned that Writ Petition No. 4392 of 2001 (old CMWP No. 11533 of 1993), Parmahendra and others Vs. State of U.P., through Collector Nainital and others, was preferred by the petitioners, for quashing the judgment and order dated 22-9-1992 passed by Prescribed Authority/Additional District Magistrate(Finance) Nainital as well as judgment and order dated 4-3-1993 passed by Commissioner, Kumaun Division, Nainital. The dispute involved in the present writ petition relates to the land, which is subject matter of Writ Petition No. 4392 of 2001, wherein the final order dated 22-9-1992 was passed by the Prescribed Authority after considering the objections filed by the petitioners of the present writ petition. That writ petition has already been disposed of by this Court today and the operative portion of the order reads as under:- “The writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and orders passed by the two courts below are set aside. The Prescribed Authority concerned is directed to demarcate the land of Satyendra Kumar and Gajendra Kumar, sons of Shiv Narain Sharma (deceased) and that of the petitioners under Rule 10 of the Rules framed under the Act expeditiously as far as possible. Costs easy.” In the above facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 16-9-2008, passed in Writ Petition No. 4392 of 2001, Parmahendra and others Vs. State and others. ( B.S.Verma, J. ) RCP 3 4 5