THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 168 of 2010. 1. Shabir Ali, S/O Sabbir Khan, R/O 487/6 Sabri Sarai Railway Road Roorkee, District Haridwar. 2. Kaser W/O Saukat Ali, R/O 487/18 Sabri Sarai, Railway Road, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 3. Tajim Khan S/O Naim Khan, R/) 487 Sabri Sarai, Railway Road, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 4. Amna W/O Late Mohd. Yameen, R/O Sabri Sarai, Railway Road, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 5. Inayat Ali, S/O Azmat Ali, R/O 135 Sabri Sarai, Railway Road Roorkee, District Haridwar. … Petitioners. Vs. 1. State of Uttarakhand, through District Magistrate, Haridwar District Haridwar. 2. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Roorkee, Distt Haridwar. 3. Uttarakhand Waqf Board, 313 Cham Vihar Lain No.7, Niranjanpur, Dehradun, Distt Dehradun. …Respondents. Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. K.P.Upadhyay, Addl. C.S.C., learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and 2. Ms. Neelima Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Sri D.Barthwal, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. Date February 16, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Stay Application No. 642 of 2010) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to demolish the houses of the petitioners and to evict them without adopting due procedure of law. According to the petitioners, they are in possession of the property situated within Sabri Sarai belonging to respondent no.3 and they are regularly paying the licence fee to the Waqf Board for which receipts are being issued to them. After getting the licence from the Waqf Board, the petitioners about 30 years back with its consent raised 2 permanent construction thereon. The petitioners are enjoying the property since then. On 11-2-2010, the respondent no.2- S.D.M. Roorkee visited the spot and warned the petitioners to vacate the premises within three days as the same has to be demolished. It has also been alleged by the petitioners that they have shown all the documents of the property to the respondent no.2 as well as respondent no.1 but they were adamant not to pay any heed to the petitioners in the matter. I have perused the material placed before this Court and the averments made by the petitioners in the writ petition. There is no mention in the petition as to on which plot number, the petitioners have got their houses constructed or on which plot the property in question is situated. No document of right and title of the petitioners over the property in question has been filed along with the petition, which could indicate that the construction has been made by the petitioners in their own land and not over the public land/road. Without any evidence placed on record, in writ jurisdiction the disputed questions of fact cannot be verified. For verification of factual position, survey is necessary. Moreover, the relief sought for by the petitioners is in the nature of an injunction order, for which the petitioners may approach the civil court for redressal of their grievance. The writ petition is devoid of any merit and is liable to the dismissed outright at the threshold. The writ petition is dismissed in limine. However, the petitioners may file civil suit before the competent court to prove their title, if so advised. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP 3