Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3647 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shambhu Lal Respondent :- State Of Up And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Sen,Ram Sheel Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents for taking appropriate action on resolution passed by the Land Management Committee. Relief sought by the petitioner reads as under:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents for taking appropriate action on the resolution passed by the land Management Committee of village Hela Gram Panchayat Bagadari, Block and Tehsil Manikpur, district Chitrakoot dated 10.9.2013 under the Gram Panchayat Act Annexure no. 2 to the writ petition."
The grievance of the petitioner is that the Land Management Committee of the Village Hela, Gram Panchayat Bagadari, Block and Tehsil Manikpur, District Chitrakoot has taken a resolution on 10.9.2013 for cancelling the notification under Section-4 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. It was further resolved that the Village should be kept out of the consolidation proceedings. A copy of the resolution is on the record as annexure-2 to the writ petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
The petitioner for redressal of his grievance has already made a representation to the Commissioner, Consolidation on 27.3.2018 which is also on record as annexure-10 to the writ petition.
The U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 is a complete Code in itself. This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot issue a direction upon the respondents to cancel the Section-4 notification as desired by the petitioner.
The Supreme Court in several cases has observed that it is high time that the High Courts should discourage frivolous litigation in petty matters as the roaster of the courts is chocking with huge pendency of the cases. Encouraging the litigation in petty matters is causing problems to the Courts to decide important cases which are becoming infructuous. The Court has further observed that to curb the tendency to file writ petition for petty matters, the Court should impose heavy cost on the litigants. Reference may be made to the judgment in the case of Phool Chandra and another v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 13 SCC 112.
It is open to the petitioner to take recourse to such remedy which is available to him under the law. In the case at hand the petitioner has already moved a representation. He may pursue his representation before the respondent no. 2.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 Digamber