IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WPCRL No. 922 of 2008 Pramod Kumar @ Lav Kush Singh ………….. Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. …………. Respondents ………… Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondents. 7th January, 2009 Coram: Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble Sudhansu Dhulia, J. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of Mandamus directing and commanding the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the property i.e. Khasra No.309/2 Village Nagla, Tehsil Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar except in accordance with law. Further relief has been sought for a writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to take immediate steps for the protection of property, life and liberty of the petitioner and his family. 2. Facts in nutshell are that U.P. zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act came into force from 1.7.1969. The father of the petitioner was continuing in possession of the plot (a small piece of land forming part of Khsara No. 309) situate at Tehsil Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar and no eviction proceeding started against him at that time. In the year, 1970, the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh vide notification dated declared some part of Khasra No. 309 as reserved forest and some part of Khasra No. 309, which became the part of Reserved Forest, was recorded in the revenue record as Khasra No. 309/1. After the said notification, the petitioner’s father continued in the cultivatory possession over the land forming part of khasra No. 309/1 and some other khasra No.309 (Khasra NO. 309/2), which was recorded in the name of Tarai State Farm. 3. Petitioner has submitted that the land under the cultivatory possession of the father of the petitioner is partially under Khasra No. 309/1 and partially under Khasra No.309/2. The respondent no.3 started evicting the petitioner form Khasra No. 309/1, therefore, he (father of the petitioner) filed a Civil Suit No. 104 of 1982 Arjun Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. and in the course of litigation, second Appeal No.42 of 2001 Arjun Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. arising out of the suit was finally decided by this Court on 3.5.2007 against the petitioner and the respondents were directed not to dispossess the petitioner except in accordance with law. 4. Petitioner has submitted before passing the order dated 3.5.2007, the Police Personnel came and destroyed the construction property of the petitioner on 28.3.2007. Further, on 30.09.2007, Ranger of the Forest Department submitted a report showing that the alleged encroachment made by the petitioner has been vacated by the local administration. It has been submitted that the forest authorities have nothing to do with khasra No. 309/2, but some local mafia in the garb of forest authorities and local administration forcibly trying to cut the standing crops form the land. The petitioner has submitted that in this regard, he has written several letters to the local administration and the forest authorities, but no action has yet been taken by them. 5. After thorough perusal of the writ petition and the documents enclosed therewith, we do not find any force in the submission of the petitioner that he has threat perception of this life, property and liberty from anybody. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with this writ petition. 6. This writ petition lacks merit and is hereby dismissed along with the pending application(s). No order as to costs. (Sudhansu Dhulia, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.) 7.01.2009 7.01.2009 Rathour