Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS No.

and Registrar’s order with Signatures WPMB/ 52/ 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Vinay Kumar and Mr. Sachin Veer Singh, learned counsel or the petitioners.

2. Mr. Yogesh Tiwari, learned Addl. C.S.C. along with Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

3. By means of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to comply with Rule 2A and Rule 3(1) of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006; further, to conclude the hearing on the claims in accordance with law within a stipulated time; and also to issue a direction restraining the respondents from evicting the petitioners or stopping their agricultural activities till completion of verification and due procedure as prescribed under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners belong to the Van Gujjar community, a recognized forest-dwelling community, and that their principal source of livelihood is animal husbandry, particularly the sale of milk produced by their cattle. It is further submitted that several members of the Van Gujjar community are also engaged in agricultural activities on land under their traditional occupation. Learned counsel would contend that the forest officials, in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice and the statutory safeguards provided under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, have arbitrarily restrained the petitioners from carrying out agricultural activities and have also orally threatened them with eviction, without following due process of law.

5. It is further submitted that a legal notice-cum-representation dt. 07.05.2025 was submitted to the District Magistrates, Nainital and Udham Singh Nagar, as well as to the concerned Forest Authorities, seeking compliance with Rule 2A and Rule 3(1) of the Rules, 2008 in respect of claims pertaining to Tarai East Forest Division. A subsequent notice-cum-representation dated 05.06.2025 was also submitted; however, despite lapse of sufficient time, no decision has been taken by the respondent authorities till date.

6. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the applications filed by the petitioners are pending consideration on account of the non-availability of the Gram Pradhan and other concerned officials, and that no coercive steps have been taken by the respondents to evict the petitioners.

7. The submission so made on behalf of the State is placed on record.

8. In view of the admitted position that the claims of the petitioners under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 are pending consideration, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the applications filed by the petitioners under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a reasonable period.

9. It is further directed that till final adjudication of the claims, the respondents shall refrain from initiating any coercive action, including eviction of the petitioners or interference with their peaceful possession and agricultural activities on the