Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19102 of 2019 Petitioner :- Afzal Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jyoti Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State-respondents.
The writ petition is directed against a notice issued to the petitioner by the respondent no.2 under Rule 67 (2) of the U.P. Revenue Code 2006 because petitioner is allegedly in occupation of land of the Gaon Sabha.
In my considered opinion, challenge to a notice is not tenable.
The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that he is not in possession over the land in question regarding which notice has been issued to him.
This argument, by itself shows that this writ petition is mala fide. In case, the petitioner was not in a possession, he cannot be aggrieved by a notice issued for his dispossession.
Moreover, there is no reason why he should be aggrieved and approach this Court without filing a reply to the notice.The petitioner may, if he is desires, contest the proceeding to be drawn on the basis of the impugned notice.
Subject to the above observations, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Radhika