##PAGE1##

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 1 April, 2026 Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 1 April, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit Bench: Pankaj Purohit

2026:UHC:2289 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition Misc. Single No.739 of 2026

01st April, 2026 Rajeshwari Yadav Gupta ............Petitioner

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others ............Respondents

With Writ Petition Misc. Single No.741 of 2026 Writ Petition Misc. Single No.742 of 2026 Writ Petition Misc. Single No.745 of 2026 Writ Petition Misc. Single No.751 of 2026

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Ms. Tanupriya Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Suyash Pant, learned S.C. for the State/respondent nos.1 and

4.

Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for respondent no.2, through video conferencing.

Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no.3, through video conferencing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions, therefore, these petitions are clubbed together and decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity and

convenience, facts of WPMS No.739 of 2026 alone are being considered and discussed.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned eviction notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the respondent no.2 and subsequent usigned, unstamped and undated impugned notice (suchna) affixed on the dwellings of the residencies on 15.02.2026 as being

arbitrary.

2026:UHC:2289

3. Facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner in this writ petition has challenged the alleged arbitrary and illegal actions of the Respondents in issuing impugned eviction notice dated

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/59963688/ 1

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 1 April, 2026

21.11.2025 and further escalating matters by pasting unsigned, unstamped and undated impugned notice (Suchna) on the dwellings of the petitioners on 15.02.2026, directing them to vacate within three days, putting them under threat of demolition and forced rehabilitation. She states these coercive measures have been undertaken without jurisdiction, in teeth of subsisting judicial orders, and in complete disregard of statutory protections. She also alleges that the petitioner and other residents of the basti have been residing in the area prior to 11.03.2016, the statutory cut-off date under the Uttarakhand Special Provisions for Urban Local Bodies and Authorities Act, 2018 and are

therefore entitled to protection from eviction or punitive action until 2027.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned actions are vitiated by arbitrariness and irrationality, inasmuch as only a few individuals have been randomly selected for relocation while the majority of residents remain uncertain of their fate which is, contrary to the true intent of the statutes, which contemplate a comprehensive and sustainable solution for all slum dwellers. He further submits that no declared or written rehabilitation policy has been placed on record, no socio- economic survey has been conducted, and no consultation has been held with the petitioner/Basti residents regarding family size, suitability, or adequacy of the proposed flats as contemplated under "Uttarakhand Reforms, Regularisation, Rehabilitation, Resettlement and Prevention of Encroachment of the Slums located in Urban Local Bodies of the State Act, 2016 (Uttarakhand Act No.18 of 2016). She states that grave concerns regarding safety and 2026:UHC:2289 habitability have been ignored, as the flats are stated to be situated within a floodplain zone and are inadequate for large families. The entire process is being carried out in undue haste, demonstrating an attempt to abdicate responsibilities under the Act