Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35584 of 2018 Petitioner :- Devendra Pratap Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shachindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Heard counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel for the respondent no. 1 to 5 and 10.
The writ petition has been filed with various prayers.
The first prayer is to direct the respondents to make entry of the name of acquiring body (PWD) in the revenue records in respect of plot no. 207/3 (New Plot No. 356) at Village Basraha Tarhar, Tehsil Bara, District Prayagraj. The second prayer is that the respondents no. 8 and 9 (private persons) be directed not to raise any construction on the land of the petitioner. The third prayer is that a direction be issued upon government respondents to take legal action against the authorities who have not taken proper action for securing entry in the revenue records. The fourth prayer is an elaboration of the third prayer.
The averments made in the writ petition suggest that earlier some land was acquired in the year 1973-74 for the purpose of building/widening of road Ghoorpur to Pratapur. It is claimed that acquisition of land was not properly reflected in the revenue records as a consequence whereof the development shifted to other plots that were not acquired. It is stated in paragraph 16 that taking advantage of non recording of the acquirer's name the respondents no. 8 and 9 had started raising construction on the land of the petitioner for which the petitioner had to institute a suit and obtain an injunction. It is also the grievance of the petitioner that plot no. 324 is shown less in area in the map than what it is recorded in the khatauni.
From the pleadings of the petitioner it appears that the grievance of the petitioner relates to correction of the map as also proper demarcation of plots; and as regards raising of construction by private respondent nos. 8 and 9. For resolution of such issues appropriate forum has been provided under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Moreover, the petitioner has already approached civil court against the private respondent no. 8 and 9 therefore the petitioner can pursue his remedy in the civil court as against private respondents. In so far as the other reliefs are concerned recourse to provisions of U.P. Revenue Code be taken.
With the aforesaid liberty this petition is disposed off. Order Date :- 26.10.2018 Ujjawal (Mahboob Ali,J) (Manoj Misra,J)