Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9577 of 2018 Petitioner :- Committee Of Management Adarsh Kushth Udyog Ashram, Sri Gandhi Kushth Ashram And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- M J Akhtar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1, 2 and 3; and perused the record.
The claim of the petitioners is that they are a registered Society having an Ashram on Plot No. 116 which is recorded in the name of Ashram.
Their grievance is that the State Authorities have illegally disturbed their possession; in which connection, a representation has been moved before the District Collector, Sahjahanpur, but no action has been taken.
For taking action on the representation, this petition has been filed.
On 15.03.2018, the learned Standing Counsel was required to seek instruction in the matter.
Pursuant to the order dated 15.03.2018, written instructions have been obtained, which have been passed on to the Court.
Instructions would reveal that action has been taken in respect of Plot No. 95 and not Plot No. 116. It is stated that Plot No. 95 is recorded as Gaon Sabha Abadi in class 6(2).
It is thus the submission of the learned Standing Counsel that under the garb of getting his representation decided, the petitioner seeks adjudication of his right and title over immovable property.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that under the garb of taking possession of Plot No. 95, the State-respondents have taken possession of the Ashram which stands over Plot No. 116 and therefore the State-respondents should be directed to ascertain the identity and location of the property before taking any action.
As the identity of the plot and the location of the Ashram over the plot is in dispute, a direction to the State-respondents to take a decision on the claim, who have themselves raised the dispute, would serve no purpose. The appropriate remedy for the petitioners is to institute a suit for injunction or for such other relief as they may be advised.
However, there being a dispute as regards the location and identity of immovable property, this Court does not consider it appropriate to entertain such a dispute in writ jurisdiction or to issue a direction to the State-respondents to decide the claim when they themselves have raised the dispute.
Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to appropriate civil remedy, as may be advised.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Sunil Kr Tiwari