In this PIL where the petitioner pressed for withdrawal while respondents claimed rights over the property based on a decree, the court did not proceed further and dismissed the petition as not pressed.
The Public Interest Litigation stands dismissed as not pressed.
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. - 10
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3782 of 2018
Petitioner :- Dhani Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Kumar Singh,Anil Kumar Srivastava,Vipin Chandra Pal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Brij Kumar Yadav,Pradeep Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
On the matter being taken up, Sri V.C.Pal who has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner apprised to the Court that the withdrawal application is being moved in the present matter and the petitioner Dhani Ram is also present in the Court today. It has also been submitted that the present PIL has been preferred on behest of the Pradhan and he had no idea about consequence of the same as such request has been made for withdrawal of the present PIL.
On the other hand, Sri P.K.Rai, learned counsel for the respondent states that the suit in question under Section 229-B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. has been decreed in favour of father of the respondent no. 7. Against which the revision was filed, the same was also dismissed and the review application is being pursued by the respondent.
Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Standing Counsel also apprised to the Court that the objection has also been taken by the Staterespondent and certain rights have been claimed over the property in question on the basis of Bhumidhari.
In the facts and circumstances, once the petitioner himself is pressing for withdrawal and claim and counter-claim has been set up in the matter, the Court is not inclined to proceed further in the matter.
Consequently, the present PIL stands dismissed as not pressed .
Order Date :- 24.4.2019 A.K.Srivastava
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present Public Interest Litigation (PIL) should proceed when the petitioner is pressing for its withdrawal.
Dhani Ram
State Of U.P.
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
A.K.Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
