SHIVAKANT PATHAK DEVESH BISHNOI vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPMS/1364/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 19th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010079812026

Filing Number

WPMS/4151/2026

Filing Date

12-May-2026

Registration No

WPMS/1364/2026

Registration Date

12-May-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

19-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHIVAKANT PATHAK DEVESH BISHNOI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

  2. 2.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.DIRECTORATE OF REHABILITATION

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.SENIOR MANAGER

  5. 5.DEPUTY REVENUE OFFICER

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar TiwariView PDF

    The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Shivakant Pathak challenging an eviction notice for unauthorized encroachment on Plot No.58-A in Haridwar. The court found that the petitioner lacked locus standi as he could not establish ownership rights and that the land was actually allotted to Ram Chandra Nautiyal under the Tehri Dam rehabilitation scheme. The court held that title disputes and factual questions cannot be resolved through writ petitions and must be addressed in civil courts. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-May-2026

    Fresh Cases As Defective -236

    Registrar (Judicial)

  4. 12-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/1364/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Shivakant Pathak challenging an eviction notice for unauthorized encroachment on Plot No.58-A in Haridwar. The court found that the petitioner lacked locus standi as he could not establish ownership rights and that the land was actually allotted to Ram Chandra Nautiyal under the Tehri Dam rehabilitation scheme. The court held that title disputes and factual questions cannot be resolved through writ petitions and must be addressed in civil courts. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case