Disposed

Uma Devi and 2 Others v. Union of India through the Ministry of Railway and Another

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2019WRIC/31107/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the affixation of a demolition notice on petitioners’ houses in Allahabad, alleged to be unauthorized constructions. The court dismissed the petition, allowing authorities to proceed under the relevant Act but prohibiting demolition without a conclusive order from the Estate Officer.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the writ petition allowing the respondents to proceed under the Act, subject to no demolition without a conclusive order of the Estate Officer.

Uma Devi and 2 Others Vs Union of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Chief Justice's Court

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31107 of 2018 Petitioner :- Uma Devi And 2 Others Respondent :- Union Of India Through The Ministry Of Railway And Another

¶3

Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Kumar,Janardan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Vivek Kumar Rai,A.H.Gupta,Arum Kr. Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶5

This petition for writ is preferred to have an appropriate writ order or direction to quash the notice said to be affixed on the petitioners' houses i.e H.No.1A/3, Rajrooppur Allahabad, H.No.2H/3F, Rajrooppur Allahabad and H.No.2H/3 Rajrooppur Allahabad for their demolition being said to be constructed unauthorisedly.

¶6

As per the averments contained in the petition for writ, houses on the landin-question were registered at Nagar Nigam, Allahabad in the name of the petitioners and as such, they are the owners of the same. In alternatively also stated that the notices impugned are absolutely illegal being not satisfied, their requirements of Section 4 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupant) Act, 1971.

¶7

A counter to petition for writ has been filed stating therein that the Estate Officer while invoking powers under Section 4 (1) the Act of 1971, called upon the petitioners to submit explanation under the notice dated 6th July, 2018. The petitioners refused to accept the notice and therefore, the notice was affixed at the wall of the house concerned. It is stated that the land-inquestion is recorded in the name of Indian Railways in the revenue record and the petitioners are nothing but trespassers, as such, they have been subjected to the proceedings under the Act of 1971.

¶8

Having considered the facts stated and the counter affidavit, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition for writ by keeping the respondents - Divisional Railway Manager, Engineering, Northern Central Railway, Allahabad, at liberty to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with the Act of 1971 and further not to demolish the constructions-in-question without having a conclusive order of the Estate Officer under the Act of 1971.

¶9

The petitioners, who are otherwise now having a copy of the notice along with the counter affidavit may appear before the Estate Officer concerned in the week commencing from March 11, 2019 .

¶10

Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Rishabh

¶11

(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.) (Govind Mathur, C, J.)

Uma Devi and 2 Others v. Union of India through the Ministry of Railway and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Devi and 2 Others v. Union of India through the Ministry of Railway and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dwijendra Ram Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Amalesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Hadisun Nisha Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Naresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others

Umar Mohammad Vs Union of India and 4 Others

Paras Jain (Minor) Vs Union of India and 2 Others