Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31314 of 2019 Petitioner :- Badrul Rahman Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Sri Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents.
2. Though this writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but in fact this is a suit for injunction against private respondents 4 to 7, inasmuch as, prayer has been made that respondents 2 and 3, who are Sub Divisional Magistrate and Senior Superintendent of Police respectively, be directed to take action against respondents 4 to 7 after making enquiry and get land in question handed over to petitioner.
3. We repeatedly enquired from learned counsel for petitioner, as to how respondents 2 and 3 can indulge in transferring possession of an immovable property from one private person to another and under which provisions they have such power, since it involves civil rights of parties, which have to be adjudicated by Civil Court in appropriate proceedings and Executive Authorities have no authority to interfere, but he could neither give any reply nor placed any provision conferring such power upon respondents-2 and 3.
4. Petitioner, in fact, has remedy in common law by filing suit for injunction and delivery of possession against private respondents 4 to 7.
5. Writ petition is, therefore, dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Manish Himwan