Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31416 of 2021 Petitioner :- Laxman @ Lakshman Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pavan Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
In Re. impleadment application No. 3 of 20121:-
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
The instant impeadment application has been filed to implead the Gaon Sabha concerned in the array of parties of the present writ petition as respondent No. 6.
Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the impleadment application.
Accordingly, the impleadment application is allowed.
Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the Gaon Sabha as respondent No. 6 in the array of parties of the present writ petition during the course of the day.
Order on writ petition
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent No. 1, 2 and 4 and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, who is representing the Gaon Sabha (respondent No. 6) The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quashing of the order dated 15.7.2021 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Muhammadabad Gohan, District Mau and auction dated 31.12.2020 held in village Amiraha, Paragana Chiraiyakot, Tehsil Muhammdbad Gohana, District-Mau, by which the fisheries right with regard to pond No. 404 Kha area about 1.101 hectare situated in village Amirha, Paragana-Chiraiyakot, Tehsil Muhammdabad Gohana, District has been settled in favour of respondent no. 5.
B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 4 to make a fresh allotment of fisheries right with regard to the pond no. 404 kha aread about 1.101 hectare, situated in village Amiraha, Paragana Chiraiyakot, Tehsil Mohammdabad Gohana, District-Mau.
C. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 4 to allow the petitioner to take the fishes which is poured in the said pond."
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that fresh approval of fisheries lease has illegally been granted in favour of the contesting- respondent No. 5 in violation of the provisions of law, therefore, it should be cancelled.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has an alternative remedy to challenge the approval order of the fisheries lease under the provisions of law as embodied under Rule 59 of the U.P. Revenue Code, Rules 2016.
In this conspectus, as above, the present writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. It is open for the petitioner to approach before the competent court under the provisions of law to redress his grievance as mentioned in the present writ petition.
Order Date :- 17.12.2021 Sumaira