Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14381 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vijai Shanker And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manju Thakur Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Diwakar Singh,Madan Mohan,Parmeshwar Yadav
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sri Manju Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rajesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent and Sri Divakar Singh, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.
The present matter was taken up on 3.5.2018 and Court has proceeded to pass the following order:
"Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Rajesh Srivastava, Advocate appearing for the State respondents and Shri Diwakar Singh, learned counsel appearing for Gaon Sabha.
Petitioners are before this Court assailing the validity of order dated 17.07.2017 passed by second respondent by which it has been held that on the spot as per the provision contained under Section 41 of Land Revenue Act, the actual demarcation is not feasible.
Learned counsel for the petitioner in support os his submission states that earlier on 08.11.2016, order to the similar effect under Section 24 of U.P. Land Revenue Code was passed by the second respondent and the same has been assailed in Revision and the Revisional Court by order dated 24.03.2017 has asked to official concerned to ensure the demarcation in question but in most arbitrary manner and in cyclostyle order, the official/officer concerned has repeated the earlier order without carrying out any actual demarcation on the spot.
In the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order impugned is unsustainable as the Revisional Court has proceeded to pass a categorical order and in spite of complying the same with utmost sincerity and carrying out proper demarcation of the land, the official/officer concerned has again proceeded to pass the order impugned containing of similar facts.
In regard thereto, this Court proceeds to direct the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Handia, Allahabad to carry out proper demarcation of the land under his supervision and submit a report directly to Shri Rajesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for producing the same before this Court on the next date fixed in the matter.
Put up this matter again on 21.05.2018 in Additional Cause List. This order is to be given to learned Standing Counsel free of cost."
Thereafter the matter was again listed before this Court on 21.5.2018 and the Court was of the opinion that in the present matter the Advocate Commission was required and consequently proceeded to pass a detailed order. In response thereof today when the matter is taken up, Sri Rajesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel has placed the Advocate Commission report dated 26.5.2018, the same is taken on record. On the basis of Advocate Commission report dated 26.5.2018, he submits that he himself visited the spot in presence of five Revenue Officers and it was after visiting the spot they are all of the considered opinion, the relief as has been sought by means of the present writ petition cannot be accorded and the appropriate remedy to file suit in the matter.
In the facts and circumstances, considering the detailed Advocate Commission report, the Court is also of the opinion that in case demarcation is not physically possible under section 44 of the Land Revenue Code, 2006, then the remedy lies to institute suit. Consequently no relief can be accorded by this Court.
Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Manish Tripathi