Writ petition challenging District Magistrate's order on pond land encroachment dismissed as petitioner, as complainant, has no further remedy from a categorical factual finding against his claim.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36023 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manoj Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Rajesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel appears for the State-respondent and Sri Manoj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.
Petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of the order impugned dated 26.5.2018 passed by District Magistrate, Varanasi/second respondent in compliance of the order dated 9.1.2018 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C No. 1006 of 2018 (Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others).
At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel raised an objection that the aforementioned writ petition was preferred by the petitioner on the allegation that the private respondent arrayed as fourth respondent has encroached upon the pond land regarding which he has made a complaint before the District Magistrate. The said writ petition was disposed of directing the District Magistrate to consider the application of the petitioner and in compliance of the same the District Magistrate on the basis of record has already proceeded to decide the case by a detailed order. In case, the petitioner has any grievance, he has remedy to approach to the competent forum but no relief can be extended to the petitioner at this stage in the present writ petition.
Once the objection is being raised, the Court has proceeded to examine the record and finds that admittedly the status of the petitioner is a complainant. He has approached before the Division Bench of this Court and at the admission stage, the Court has proceeded to direct the District Magistrate to consider the application of the petitioner and in compliance of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, the District Magistrate with detailed observation has passed the order impugned. Once, the District Magistrate has made categorical finding that at no point of time, the private respondent has ever encroached upon the pond, in such situation, there is no reason or occasion to interfere in the order impugned.
The writ petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 A.K.Srivastava
Sanjay Kumar
State Of U P
District Magistrate, Varanasi
Gaon Sabha
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
