RAJIV KUMAR vs COMPETENT AUTHORITY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Advocate - C.S.C. — WPMS/1523/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.

Next hearing 09-Jun-2026

CNR: UKHC010088092026

Filing Number

WPMS/4596/2026

Filing Date

22-May-2026

Registration No

WPMS/1523/2026

Registration Date

22-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

MISC MATTERS ( 47 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Last updated 30-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJIV KUMAR

    Adv. SAGAR KOTHARI,SUNAYNA KOHLI KOTHARI,SUNAYNA KOHLI KOTHARI, ,SUNAYNA KOHLI KOTHARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.COMPETENT AUTHORITY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Advocate - C.S.C.

  2. 2.SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.TEHSILDAR DEHRADUN

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. 09-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  3. 29-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

    Case Summary: In WPMS No. 1523 of 2026, petitioner Rajiv Kumar claimed compensation for land allegedly acquired by NHAI. The court identified a procedural defect: NHAI was not impleaded as a party-respondent despite being the acquiring authority. The petition was adjourned to enable the petitioner's counsel to file an appropriate application to implead NHAI. Case listed for fresh hearing on 09.06.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 26-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 22-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/1523/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: In WPMS No. 1523 of 2026, petitioner Rajiv Kumar claimed compensation for land allegedly acquired by NHAI. The court identified a procedural defect: NHAI was not impleaded as a party-respondent despite being the acquiring authority. The petition was adjourned to enable the petitioner's counsel to file an appropriate application to implead NHAI. Case listed for fresh hearing on 09.06.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case