This bench dismissed a writ petition challenging a notice removing the petitioner from occupation of nazul land, noting that the claim admits no merit if the petitioner is not in possession.
The writ petition is dismissed due to lack of merit.
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. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2934 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mohd. Azeem Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Surendra Pal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 16.10.2018 issued by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Pilibhit directing that the petitioner is in occupation of nazul land and he must remove his possession.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land in question is Kabristan and the petitioner is not in possession of the same.
If the petitioner admits that he has no possession over the land in question, there is no reason to impugn the notice dated 16.10.2018.
There is no merit in this writ petition and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 Shahroz
(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging a notice for removal from nazul land admits merit if the petitioner concedes non-possession.
Mohd. Azeem
State Of U P
2 Others
Abhinava Upadhya
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
