Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Kripa Shankar vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 July, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Chief Justice's Court
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4042 of 2018 Petitioner :- Kripa Shankar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajeev Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
The only prayer made in the writ petition reads thus:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the Case No. D201802030001813 of 2017; Kripa Shankar Vs. Amresh Chandra & others, U/s 15A of U.P. Bhoodan Yagan Act, 1952, as expeditiously as possible preferably within the stipulated period of time as granted by this Hon'ble Court."
Petitioner having no concern or connection with the lands allotted in favour of 98 persons under the provisions of U.P. Bhoodan Yagan Act, 1952, has filed the instant writ petition seeking direction to decide his application under Section 15A of the said Act. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has not made 98 allottees as party respondents to the instant writ petition. He is not in a position to state that as to when the lands were allotted to these allottees. Admittedly, petitioner never applied for allotment of land. In this backdrop, we have perused the provisions contained in Section 15A which provides that the Collector may on his own motion and shall on the report of the Committee or on the application of any person "aggrieved" by the grant of any land made under Section 14, can seek cancellation of allotment/grant. Petitioner has not demonstrated either in the writ petition or even his counsel across the Bar as to how the petitioner is a aggrieved person. In the circumstances, we are of the prima facie view that the petitioner's application under Section 15A itself may not be maintainable and in view thereof and considering that the petitioner has not added those 98 persons as party respondents, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 VMA (Dilip B Bhosale, CJ) (Yashwant Varma, J)
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Kripa Shankar vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 July, 2018
Judges
  • Dilip B Bhosale Chief
Advocates
  • Rajesh Kumar Singh