I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK MAHRA

2^ND APRI L, 2025 WRI T PETI TI ON ( PI L) No. 13 OF 2025 Dr. Uma Bhatt …..Petitioner Versus Union of India and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D.S. Mehta and Ms.

Medha Pande, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondents. : Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India.

Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Standing Counsel with Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel for respondent No. 6.

JUDGMENT : (per Sri G. Narendar, C.J.)

Heard Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Chief Standing Counsel with Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

2. Petitioners have prayed for a slew of directions, which are as under:-

“i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to comply with all judicial orders issued by Hon’ble High Court and Apex Court with regards to the conservation / protection town of Nainital.

ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to stop the demolition of the building of Post Office situated at Tallital, Nainital, for the purpose of construction of a parking / road widening for facilitating traffic flow.

iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to stop the shifting plans of statue of Mahatma Gandhi situated at Tallital, Nainital, for the purpose of construction of a parking / road widening for facilitating traffic flow.

iv) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to stop the shifting plans of statue of Pt. G.B.Pant situated at Mallital, Nainital, for the purpose of construction of a parking / road widening for facilitating traffic flow.

v) issue a writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to make parking lots in the periphery of Nainital and introduce shuttle buses to pick and drop passengers from there, so that the influx of vehicles to Nainital can be reduced.

vi) issue a writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to determine carrying capacity of the Nainital town and regularly update it. vii) issue a writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to regularly measure the Air Quality Index of Nainital.

viii) issue a writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to identify the narrow roads and prohibit plying of vehicles in these roads and ensure the walking space in every road and ensure the safety and convenience of pedestrians.

ix) issue a writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to stop the administration to waste the money in the name of beautification of Nainital.

x) issue a writ, order or direction to direct the respondent authorities to declare all important historical structures / monuments of Nainital as Heritage according to the Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.

xi) issue any other appropriate relief in facts and circumstances of the matter.

xii) Award costs of this Petition to the Petitioner.”

3. As regards the first prayer, it is needless to say that the Authorities are law-bound to comply with the directions emanating from the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court and other Courts.

4. As regards the second prayer, it is contended that the Post Office is a heritage building, and this Bench has personally visited the building, which is an old wooden structure. During the personal inspection by the Bench, it was seen that the interiors have been extensively modified using plywood, boards etc. and looks anything but a heritage. It is a small space, wherein the post office has been established.

5. As regards the third and the fourth prayers