Dismissed

Israr Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2018WPIL/4726/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL petition seeking removal of illegal possession was dismissed by the High Court. The State respondent produced instructions from Gaon Sabha and a letter from the Sub Divisional Magistrate stating there is no encroachment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to file fresh petition with cogent evidence and colored photographs in case of future encroachment; no order as to costs.

Israr Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 30

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4726 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Israr Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Srivastava,Deepak Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.

¶5

Pursuant to the order dated 2.11.2018, learned counsel for the petitioner has impleaded Gaon Sabha as respondent no. 5 and serve a copy of the petition on learned counsel appearing for the Gaon Sabha.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Arun Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and perused the record.

¶7

Present petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to take suitable action in removing the illegal possession of the respondent no. 4 from the land no. 522 area 0.0053 hectare situated in village Amroha Khas Andar Chungi, Tehsil & District Amrohad, which is recorded in the khevat as Talab (Pond).

¶8

Pursuant to order of this Court dated 2.11.2018, learned Standing Counsel has produced copy of the instructions dated 3.11.2018, which is taken on record, according to which there is no encroachment over the land in question. It is further reflected from the letter of Sub Divisional Magistrate dated 3.11.2018 that the aforesaid gata no. 522 area 0.0053 hectare is recorded as pond in khasra and in khatauni it has been recorded as talab and the same is situated within the boundaries of dargah and there is no encroachment on the same.

¶9

In such view of the matter, there is no reason to entertain the present petition.

¶10

Present petition is accordingly dismissed, however, in case any encroachment is made on the land in question, the petitioner is at liberty to file fresh petition, however, with cogent evidence of encroachment including coloured photographs of the land in question.

¶11

No order as to costs.

¶12

Order Date :- 13.11.2018 Abhishek

Israr Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israr Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bindu Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Uday Bhan Yadav and Another Vs District Magistrate and 12 Others

Jai Ma Vindvasini Khadi Gram Udyog Sansta Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Ravi Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Shri Narayan Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Lal Bahadur Bind Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others