Disposed

Lallu v. State of U.P. through Secretary (Revenue) and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2018WRIC/7505/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought relief for land encroachment and chakroad formation. Respondents alleged petition was filed illegally as grievance was already redressed. Petitioner confirmed resolution but requested liberty to agitate demarcation complaints elsewhere. Court disposed of petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to agitate grievances regarding actual demarcation before appropriate forum.

Lallu Vs State of U.P. through Secretary… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7505 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Lallu

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary (Revenue) And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyanendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Brij Kumar Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The petitioner is before this Court for a direction to second respondent to restrain the fourth respondent in making the illegal encroachment over the land of the petitioner and other farmers i.e. Khasara No.478M, 534, 537, 547, 542M, 560M, 563M situated in Village Allahpur, Pargana Kampil, Distt. Farrukhabad and for making Chakroad over land of Khasra No.533 area 0.0810 hect.

¶8

On the matter being taken up on 26.2.2018, the Court has directed learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions including the copy of demarcation report, if any, filed by the Halka Lekhpal. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 02.04.2018 and the Court has proceeded to pass the following order:-

¶9

"In compliance of the earlier orders passed by this Court, learned Standing Counsel has produced the instructions sent by the Sub Divisional Officer, Farrukhabad dated 28.3.2018, which is taken on record. Learned Standing Counsel states that as per the instructions this much is clearly reflected that at no point of time this writ petition has been filed by Lallu and moreover so far as the grievance of Lallu is concerned, the same has already been redressed by the respondents and as such there was no reason or occasion for him to file this writ petition.

¶10

Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks two days time to seek instructions in the matter. Put up this matter as fresh on 05.04.2018."

¶11

On the matter being taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of instructions submits that so far as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned, the same is redressed. However, liberty may be given to the petitioner that in case he has any grievance regarding the actual demarcation, he may agitate the same before appropriate forum.

¶12

In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of with observation that in case the petitioner has any grievance regarding the actual demarcation, he may agitate the same before the appropriate forum.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.4.2018 SP/

Lallu v. State of U.P. through Secretary (Revenue) and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lallu v. State of U.P. through Secretary (Revenue) 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

Kanchi Singh and 16 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Anukh Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rameshari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ramesh Chandra Gautam Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

lal bahadur tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 4 others

Kamla Shanker Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others