Dismissed

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2019WRIC/12504/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that the present writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner essentially seeks relief against private respondents. Relying on precedent, the court noted that administrative authorities cannot interfere in inter se property disputes between private parties. The petition was dismissed with a direction to approach the appropriate civil forum.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12504 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Mani Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

¶6

This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶7

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner contained in representation dated 12.03.2019 (Annexure No. 8) for being ensure the possession of petitioner over the 1/2 share of house no. 847, 848, 1354 and Chabutara no. 846, 849, 1353 sitauted at Nagar Panchayat Bharatganj, Meja, Prayagraj, from the unauthorized occupation of the respondent no. 5 to 7.

¶8

A perusal of record shows that the petitioner is seeking direction against the private respondents no. 5 to 7 from interfering in the peaceful possession of the petitioner.

¶9

This Court in Writ Petition No. 50033 of 2015 ( Jitendra Bahadur Singh Vs. State of UP & others ) has held that the police and administrative authority must not interfere in the inter se dispute between two private parties in respect of immovable properties. In this regard, learned Standing Counsel has placed a Government Order dated 16.9.2015 issued by the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Government in pursuance of the order dated 4.9.2018 passed by this Court; wherein, it has been stated as follows:

¶10

"In this behalf, I am directed to say that while complying with Hon'ble High Court's order dated 04.09.2015 in letter & spirit, it be ensured that such matters of immovable property pending between the private parties, whose cases are pending before competent court or where Hon'ble Courts have passed interim order, no administrative order should be passed on miscellaneous applications. In future, if any such matter comes to the notice of the Government, then it shall be construed strictly and strict penal action shall be taken against the officers guilty for the same." [English Translation]

¶11

Since the petitioner, in substance, is seeking relief against the private respondents, the present writ petition is not maintainable.

¶12

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may take proceedings before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 11.4.2019 Amit Mishra

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gauri Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramvir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Praveen Kumar Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others