Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
VIJAY – Appellant
Versus
MUSSOORIE DEHRADUN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent
WPMS 3205 / 2025
SL. No
Date
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
D1- 02
WPMS No.3205 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for the respondent no.1/MDDA. Heard. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent nos. 2 and 3 separately sought permission from the respondent no.1/ Mussorie Dehradun Development Authority (“the Authority”) for development of their land situated at Veerpur Khurd, Rishikesh. The Authority sanctioned the plan and one of the conditions for sanctioning the map was that the constructions shall be done as per the approved map specification, but, instead of raising separate construction, according to the petitioner, the respondent nos. 2 and 3 started raising one commercial building in complete deviation of the approved map. Complaint was submitted to the Authority, but no action has been taken on it. Therefore, the petitioner seeks directions that the Authority may be directed to decide the complaints bearing Case No. C-0660 of 2021, Case No.0884 of 2024 and R-0882 of 2024, as expeditiously as possible, and take action in accordance with law under Sections 27, 28 of the Uttarakhand Urban and Country Planning and Development Act, 1973. On 19.11.2025, when the matter was taken up, learned counsel for the Authority sought time to get instructions in the matter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Authority is not taking any action on the complaint. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 are raising construction in complete deviation of the approved map. In the middle of the residential locality, they are raising a commercial construction, which affects the rights of the petitioner and others. He submits that the Authority should be directed to take action promptly, in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the Authority submits that notices have already been issued to the respondent nos. 2 and 3, and action shall be completed within a period of two months from today. The Court takes on record the statement given by learned counsel for the Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Authority should complete the action under Sections 27 and 28 of the Act within a period of two months, as respondent nos. 2 and 3 are raising construction with utmost speed. In the instant case, the Authority has admitted that complaint has been received against the respondent nos. 2 and 3 for raising construction against the sanctioned map. What is alleged against the respondent nos. 2 and 3 is that they got two separate construction plans approved from the Authority, but now they are raising a joint commercial complex in residential area. This is a very serious issue. Immediate action should be taken in such matter. If really construction is in deviation to the map, it should be stopped immediately and action should be taken in accordance with law, after affording an
opportunity of hearing to them. This Court expects that prompt action shall be taken by the Authority and action shall be completed within two months, as assured before this Court. Accordingly, in view of the statement given by learned counsel for the Authority, nothing survives in this writ petition. It stands disposed of, accordingly. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 24.11.2025 RV
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
