Disposed¶2

Naseem Ahmad v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC1 Sept 2025WPMS/798/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Qabristan / Kabristan burial-ground land dispute; writ of mandamus for burial rights; encroachment by alleged land grabbers; unregistered Kabristan Committee; rival-group dispute; disposal with direction to approach Sub-Divisional Magistrate; hearing of all stakeholders; six-month decision window; two-week representation deadline; Khasra no. 1181; Village Garhi Negi, Tehsil Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar; WPMS/798/2024; Uttarakhand High Court; Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari.

What did the court decide?

No mandamus issued; petitioner permitted to approach the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate regarding encroachment over the Kabristan land. On a representation made within two weeks (with certified copy of this order), the SDM is to hear all stakeholders, including the alleged land grabbers, and decide as per law within six months.

Naseem Ahmad Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶2

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be commanded by way of a writ of mandamus to ensure and permit the petitioner to bury dead bodies on the approximately 0.200-hectare plot bearing Khasra no. 1181 at Village Garhi Negi, Tehsil Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, which has been demarcated for Qabristan. +1 more

¶2

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of without issuing the requested mandamus; the petitioner is instead permitted to approach the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate in case of any grievance regarding encroachment over the land belonging to Kabristan.

¶2

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner makes a representation within two weeks (accompanied by certified copy of this order), the Sub-Divisional Magistrate shall look into the matter and, after hearing all stakeholders including the alleged land grabbers, take a decision as per law within six months.

¶4

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Uttarakhand High Court (single judge: Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J), WPMS/798/2024, order dated 01.09.2025. Petitioner, claiming residence at Village Garhi Negi, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to ensure and permit burial of dead bodies on a piece of land measuring about 0.200 hectare bearing Khasra no. 1181, demarcated for Qabristan. Learned State Counsel submitted that the Kabristan Committee represented by the petitioner is not registered, that a dispute subsists between two rival groups, and that the alleged land grabbers were not impleaded in the petition. Having regard to the relief sought, the writ petition was disposed of by permitting the petitioner to approach the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate for any grievance of encroachment over the Kabristan land; if the petitioner makes a representation within two weeks, the SDM is to examine the matter and, after hearing all stakeholders including the alleged land grabbers, take a decision as per law within six months from production of the representation with certified copy of the order.

¶1

2025:UHC:7727

¶2

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
			WPMS/798/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. None present for the petitioner.
			2. Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.
			3. Petitioner claims to be resident of Village Garhi Negi, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. In this petition, he has sought the following relief:-
			(i) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to ensure and permit the petitioner to bury their dead bodies over the piece of land measuring about 0.200 hectare, bearing Khasra no. 1181, situated at Village Garhi Negi, Tehsil Kashipur District Udham Singh Nagar, which has been demarcated for Qabristan. 4. Learned State Counsel, by referring to para 3 of the writ petition, submits that Kabristan Committee, which petitioner represents, is not registered. He further submits that there appears to be some dispute between two rival groups and the land grabbers, who allegedly are trying to grab the land belonging to Kabristan, are not impleaded as a party to the writ petition. 5. Having regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to approach Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned, in case, he has any grievance regarding encroachment over land belonging to Kabristan. If petitioner

¶3

2025:UHC:7727

¶4

makes such representation within two
weeks from today, Sub-Divisional
Magistrate shall look into the matter and
after hearing all the stakeholders,
including the alleged land grabbers, take
decision, as per law, within six months
from the date of production of such
representation along with certified copy
of this order.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
01.09.2025
Aswal
NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.09.01 04:39:36 -07'00'

Naseem Ahmad v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseem Ahmad v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reeta Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sandeep Goyal Vs State of Uttarakhand

Abhishek Negi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Manoj Singh Bisht Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shamsheeda Bano Vs State of Uttarakhand

Devendra Singh Mehra Vs State of Uttarakhand