Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26793 of 2019 Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Kesharwani Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
This petition has been filed for the following relief:
"1. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction restraining the respondent no. 7 to 11 from interfering in the peaceful active physical and cultivatory possession of the petitioner from over property in question i.e. Arazi No. 448, area 11.40 hect. situated at Village Dhokari, Taluka, Kulmai, Pargana Arail, Tehsil Karchhana, district Allahabad in any manner whatsoever."
A perusal of record shows that the petitioner is seeking a direction against the private Respondent No. 7 to 11, who are allegedly interfering in the peaceful possession of petitioner over the property in dispute.
This Court in Writ Petition No. 50033 of 2015 (Jitendra Bahadur Singh Vs. State of UP & others) has held that the police and administrative authority must not interfere in the inter se dispute between two private parties in respect of immovable properties. In this regard, learned Standing Counsel has placed a Government Order dated 16.9.2015 issued by the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Government in pursuance of the order dated 4.9.2018 passed by this Court wherein it has been stated as follows:
"In this behalf, I am directed to say that while complying with Hon'ble High Court's order dated 04.09.2015 in letter & spirit, it be ensured that such matters of immovable property pending between the private parties, whose cases are pending before competent court or where Hon'ble Courts have passed interim order, no administrative order should be passed on miscellaneous applications. In future, if any such matter comes to the notice of the Government, then it shall be construed strictly and strict penal action shall be taken against the officers guilty for the same." [English Translation] Since the petitioner, in substance, is seeking relief against the private respondent, the present writ petition is not maintainable.
In view of the above, we do not see any justification to interfere in the matter. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may take proceedings before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
With the above observation, writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019
vinay