The High Court held the writ petition not maintainable as the petitioner sought relief against private respondents in a property dispute, citing a Supreme Court order restraining administrative interference in such inter se disputes.
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. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20557 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Meena Kumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Singh Yadav,Varun Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Daksha Yadav, learned counsel for respondents no. 5 and 6 and learned Standing Counsel.
This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
" (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 and 3 to restrain respondent no. 5 and 6 not to create hindrance in peaceful possessin of petitioner over house no. 69/2A, Mohalla Chhote Lal Kushwaha Nagar (Sarai Lala), Allahabad."
A perusal of record shows that the petitioner is seeking a direction against the private Respondents No.5 and 6 who are causing hindrance in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the house in dispute.
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:
"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]
Since the petitioner, in substance, is seeking relief against the private respondents, the present writ petition is not maintainable.
In view of the above, we do not see any justification to interfere in the matter. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may take proceedings before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
With the above observation, writ petition stands disposed of .
Order Date :- 16.7.2019 MLK
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the present writ petition is maintainable when relief is sought against private respondents regarding a property dispute.
Whether the Court should interfere in an inter se dispute between private parties over immovable property.
Whether the Government Order dated 16.9.2015 restrains administrative interference in private property disputes pending before courts.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jitendra Bahadur Singh Vs. State of UP & othersApplied¶9
Writ Petition No. 50033 of 2015, Jitendra Bahadur Singh Vs. State of UP & others
Smt. Meena Kumari
State Of U.P.
Shashi Kant Gupta
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
