Uttarakhand High Court
WPMB/256/2026 of SANJAY KUMAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 20 April 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMB No.256 of 2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Nikhil Bhatt, learned counsel for the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMB No.256 of 2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Nikhil Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Yogesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner to grow fodder crops for his cattle as he was being permitted in the past in Jurka Area, Tarai Western Forest Division, District Udham Singh Nagar.
ii) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondents, not to disturb the dwelling of the petitioner in the periphery of Jurka, Tarai Western Forest Division, Udham Singh Nagar till the claims of the petitioner under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 are decided and to comply with Section 4(5) of the Act of 2006 in regard to petitioner's dwelling an fodder harming.”
4. In sum and substance, the petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus from this Court directing the forest authorities to permit him to grow a fodder crop inside the forest. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner is protected by the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. Unless there is a declaration by the competent authority that the petitioner is entitled to such protection, the reliefs sought cannot be granted.
5. The writ petition, however, is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate competent authority under the aforesaid Act for a declaration as a forest dweller. Once he is declared a forest dweller, all consequential benefits under the Act shall follow.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
20.04.2026 BS
BALWAN T SINGH Digitally signed by BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf7 2a17c02fe2eacbf28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F4834 6EB553DE5185F418755DC00A7A13C14A680 C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2026.04.20 19:16:33 +05'30'