Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Praveen Kumar Yadav vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 21
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 963 of 2021 Petitioner :- Praveen Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 14 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 3 and perused the record.
At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has filed the copy of instructions received by him from the authorities concerned, which is taken on the record.
Present wit petition has been filed by the petitioner in the nature of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for removal of illegal encroachment made by private respondent nos.5 to 15 over Plot no.1658-Ka, Village-Bichchibhoj-Pandah, Tehsil-Sikandarpur, District-Ballia.
The grievance of the petitioner is that he has already moved representations dated 14.02.2020, 02.03.2020 and 06.03.2020 (Annexure Nos.2, 3 and 4 respectively) before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandarpur, District-Ballia (respondent no.2) with respect to illegal encroachment made by contesting respondent nos.5 to 15, over plot in question recorded as Chak road in revenue record, but till date no action has been taken by the authority concerned against the illegal encroachment made by the contesting respondent nos.5 to 15. Due to said encroachment the local public is facing difficulties over the plot in question. In support of his case, petitioner has filed extract of Khatauni 1424 Fasli to 1429 Fasli (Annexure no.2) Learned Standing Counsel, however, contended, on the basis of instructions received by him from the authorities concerned, that total 10 eviction cases have been instituted against different persons, who are said to be in illegal possession over the property in question, under Section 67 of the Code, 2006. It is informed that the aforesaid matters are still pending in the Court of Tehsildar, Sikandarpur, Ballia and no final decision has been taken. Detail of all the 10 cases as mentioned in the instructions is given below:-
1. Case No.T2018509203255, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Tarkeshwar, Plot No.1658/0.0080
2. Case No.T2018509203256, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Lakhichandra, Plot No.1658/0.0080
3. Case No.T2018509203257, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Lakhichandra, Plot No.1658/0.0080
4. Case No.T2018509203258, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Harendra, Plot No.1658/0.0080
5. Case No.T2018509203259, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Raghunath, Plot No.1658/0.0080
6. Case No.T2018509203260, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Ravindra, Plot No.1658/0.0080
7. Case No.T2018509203261, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Radhe Shyam, Plot No.1658/0.0080
8. Case No.T2018509203262, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Prabhunath, Plot No.1658/0.0080
9. Case No.T2018509203263, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Dinanath, Plot No.1658/0.0080
10. Case No.T2018509203264, Village-Pandah (Bichchibhoj), Gaon Sabha vs. Prabhunath, Plot No.1658/0.0080 In this conspectus as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition filed in the nature of public interest litigation (PIL), without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the writ petition, with a direction to the authority concerned, before whom proceeding u/s 67 of Revenue Code 2006 is pending, to conclude the proceeding under Section 67 of the Code, 2006, which has already been initiated with respect to the land in question, within stipulated period as provided under Rule 67 (6) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, after affording opportunity of hearing to the affected persons, without granting any unnecessary adjournments.
The petitioner shall file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad, supported by an affidavit, which shall be verified by the concerned authority from the website of the High Court, Allahabad.
With the aforesaid observations, this petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 Manish Himwan
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

Praveen Kumar Yadav vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 July, 2021
Judges
  • Dinesh Pathak
Advocates
  • Sanjeev Kumar Rai