Disposed

Shiv Lakhan v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC27 Mar 2018WRIC/10608/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged forced laying of a khadanja on his Bhumidhari land. Court directed Collector Varanasi to obtain an independent measurement report under supervision of SDM within three weeks to verify encroachment and decide by a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Directed Collector Varanasi to measure land under SDM supervision within three weeks and decide by reasoned order.

Shiv Lakhan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — RTI and Transparency | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10608 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Shiv Lakhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harish Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manoj Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Krishna Murari,J. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manoj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing for respondents no. 4 and 5 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

Grievance of the petitioner is that 'khadanja' is being laid down for constructing the road from over the Bhumidhari land of the petitioner without adopting due process of law, acquiring land and paying compensation by the Gaon Sabha, by sheer use of force by the Pradhan.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been making complaints and seeking information under the Right to Information Act and initially report was submitted that the 'khadanja' has not been laid on the Bhumidhari land of the petitioner but on the old 'Rasta' and that he can get the measurement carried out in accordance with provisions of Section 24 of the Revenue Code but nothing has been done in the matter and thumb impression of the petitioner on plain paper has been obtained for the purpose of measurement on which fabricated report has been submitted stating that 'khadanja' has been carved out and 'Khadanja' on the old 'Rasta' has been laid on the basis of the compromise between the parties. When the petitioner again objected to it, no action is being taken by the authority concerned.

¶8

In the circumstances, we find it appropriate to direct the Collector, Varanasi to obtain report after carrying out the measurement as to whether the 'khadanja' has been laid on the old 'Rasta' or there is any encroachment on the Bhumidhari land of the petitioner. It is being made clear that Collector, Varanasi shall get the measurement carried out under the supervision of officers not below the rank of Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Entire exercise shall be carried out within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the order and decision be taken accordingly in respect of the grievance of the petitioner by means of a reasoned and speaking order.

¶9

With the aforesaid observations, writ petition stands finally disposed of.

¶10

Order Date :- 27.3.2018/OP

Shiv Lakhan v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Lakhan v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Tirupati Paper House and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chhete Lal Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Brij Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S Khatu Shyamji Distributors Agra Vs I.D.B.I. Bank Ltd. and 2 Others

Mohd. Farukh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shyama Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others