Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25204 of 2019 Petitioner :- Dina Nath Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raja Sahani Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Tariq Maqbool Khan
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel/Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Vineet Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of State of U.P.
The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers :-
"I. Issue a direction, Commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the representation/complaint of the petitioner dated 28- 1-2019 [Annexure no.8] within a specified period by a reasoned order.
II. Issue a direction the Commanding the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession of land of Araji no.675 measuring 0.376 Hect., Araji no.677 measuring 0.20 Hect., Araji no.678 measuring 0.16 Hect. and Araji no.679 measuring 0.113 Hect. situated in Gram Panchyat Mahuadih, Tappa Chariyon, Tehsil & District Deoria unless in accidence with law."
During the course of arguments a request was made by learned counsel for the petitioner to delete the prayer No.2 and he wants to confine his relief only with regard to prayer no.1.
The facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that the land of Araji No.675 area 0.376 hectare, Araji No.677 area 0.20 hectare, Araji No.678 area 0.16 hectare and Araji No.679 area 0.113 hectare situated in Gram Panchyat Mahuadih, Tappa Chariyon, Tehsil & District Deoria. The aforesaid land was allotted in the name of petitioner's father and brother and also the petitioner by the respondent no.3 for residential purpose although the land is recorded in the revenue record as Khaliyan.
It is contended that petitioner's father and brother have utilised their respective two decimal of land by constructing of their house and they are residing in the same and a similar patta was executed by the respondent no.4 in favour of Hosildar, Liyaqat, Balkhila, Yogendra, Sriram, Virjhan, Narsingh, Vichandi (father), Guddu, Saklu, Jairam (brother) and all of them were allotted two decimal land as residential patta and all of them are in possession of the land. It is further contended that the land adjoining the residential patta of the petitioner's father lies vacant. The certain villagers started dumping waste material on the aforesaid land in order to take the possession of the same. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action on behalf of respondents a complaint was made by the petitioner before the respondent no.2 on 16.10.2018 on which directions were given by him to the respondent no.4/Lekhpal, Gram Panchyat Madhuadih, Tappa Chariyon, Tehsil and District Deoria to restore legal possession over the Khaliyan land and removed the illegal trespassers. It is contended that wrong report has been submitted by the respondent no.4. Further the allegation of gratification was also made in paragraph 10 of the writ petition against the respondent no.4. Thereafter the petitioner made another application/complaint dated 15.12.2018 before the respondent no.2 for the removal of encroachment. A detailed report was submitted by the S.D.M. on the aforesaid representation on 11.1.2019. It is contended that although various complaints were made by the petitioner but till date no action has been taken by the district authority for the removal of illegal encroachment over the land in dispute.
A personal affidavit of District Magistrate, Deoria, was filed today in the court, the same is taken on record.
It is stated in the aforesaid affidavit that in so far as first prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition is concerned, for the said purpose remedy is available to the petitioner to approach the authority concerned as per provisions contained under U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. In so far as the second prayer is concerned, it is stated that remedy is available to the petitioner to file a civil suit for permanent injunction.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending hence with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
From perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it is clear that the land situated at Araji No.678 area 0.02 hectare was allotted by way of patta in favour of the petitioner in the year 1985. The aforesaid paper is appended as annexure 1 to the writ petition.
From perusal of the facts as narrated in the writ petition, it is clear that the dispute of the petitioner is against private respondents hence no relief could be granted to the petitioner.
At this point of time it is very fairly contended by Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel that if a fresh representation is made by the petitioner addressed to the respondent no.2 namely District Magistrate/Collector, District Deoria, he will look into the same and take appropriate action in the matter.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, present writ petition is disposed of finally permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent no.2/District Magistrate/Collector Deoria along- with certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today. If such a representation is filed, the respondent No.2 will look into the matter and pass appropriate orders for redressal of the grievances raised by the petitioner in his representation.
With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 Pramod Tripathi