Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36097 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rajdev Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar,Sushant Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sushant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Jagdish Pathak, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
The petitioner is before this Court with the request to command the respondents not to demolish the petitioner's house situated at abadi land having plot no.139 in absence of any order passed by any competent authority. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to take appropriate action in pursuance of order dated 17.12.2013 passed in PIL no.69014/2013 (Rajdev and others vs. State of U.P. and others).
Petitioner claims to be resident of Village Sahiya Bangar, Tehsil Salempur, District Deoria. He also claims to have some holding/construction over plot no.139, which is recorded as abadi land.
Learned counsel for the petitioner informed to the Court that earlier the petitioner has approached this Court by preferring PIL no.69014/2013 (Rajdev and others vs. State of U.P. and others) for removal of alleged encroachment over Bhita nos.90, 46, 131, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, total area 399 hectare and pond Nos. 126, 127, 128, 123, 129, 130 situated at Village Sahia Bangar, Goan Sabha Sahiagarh, Tehsil Salempur, District Deoria. The aforesaid Public Interest Litigation was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court on 17.12.2013 asking the respondents to draw proceedings as per provision contained under Section 122-B of UPZA&LR Act 1950. He further apprised to the Court that even the District Magistrate, Deoria by an order dated 27.03.2018 had directed the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned to take appropriate decision and finalise the proceeding.
In this backdrop, he has stated that at one hand the petitioner is espousing the cause for removal of illegal encroachment over public utility land and on the other hand, the respondents are demolishing the dwelling unit of petitioner and the same cannot travel collaterally.
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel submits that relief as has been asked for is based on mere apprehension as at no point of time any proceeding under Section 122-B of UPZA&LR Act 1950 has been drawn against the petitioner and as such, in absence of any actual cause of action, no relief can be accorded to the petitioner and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending. With the consent of the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction that in case any such proceeding is pending, the Authority concerned i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Salaempur, District Deoria shall do the needful and finalise the same in accordance with law. It is made clear that in case the petitioner has encroached upon the public utility land, he shall not be dispossessed except in accordance with law and without drawing proceeding under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act 1950.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 A. Pandey