JAI CHAND vs DISTRICT MAGISTRATE HARIDWAR — WPMS/733/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 15th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010046452026

Filing Number

WPMS/2474/2026

Filing Date

24-Mar-2026

Registration No

WPMS/733/2026

Registration Date

24-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

MISC MATTERS ( 47 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

15-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 16-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAI CHAND

    Adv. MOHD SAFDAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE HARIDWAR

  2. 2.SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.CONSOLIDATION OFFICER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.SETTLEMENT OFFICER CONSOLIDATION

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar TiwariView PDF

    Case Summary: WPMS 733/2026 Jai Chand's writ petition challenging the non-provision of chak road access to his consolidated land holdings was disposed of by the court. The court directed the District Magistrate, Haridwar to decide on the petitioner's representation within four months, noting that a prior dispute blocking road provision has been resolved and no legal impediment remains. All interested parties must be given hearing before the District Magistrate's decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Mar-2026

    Fresh Cases As Defective -236

    Registrar (Judicial)

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/733/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPMS 733/2026 Jai Chand's writ petition challenging the non-provision of chak road access to his consolidated land holdings was disposed of by the court. The court directed the District Magistrate, Haridwar to decide on the petitioner's representation within four months, noting that a prior dispute blocking road provision has been resolved and no legal impediment remains. All interested parties must be given hearing before the District Magistrate's decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case