Petitioner sought writ direction for dispossession of respondent-4 sitting on private property. The court held that evicting a private person from private property falls within civil or revenue court jurisdiction, not writ jurisdiction. Petition dismissed without prejudice to other remedies.
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. - 50
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11100 of 2020
Petitioner :- Naim Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondents-1 to 3 and have perused the record.
By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon District Collector and the Deputy Collector to dispossess respondent -4, who is a private person.
The claim of the petitioner is that respondent -4 is sitting on the property of the petitioner.
Such prayer cannot be entertained in the writ jurisdiction because the jurisdiction to adjudicate property rights of a private person and to pass decree for eviction and possession is either with the civil court or the revenue court, as the case may be.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed . Dismissal of this petition is without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to take recourse to other appropriate remedies available under the law.
Order Date :- 9.7.2020 Rahul Dwivedi/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can exercise writ jurisdiction to direct dispossession of a respondent sitting on private property.
Whether eviction and possession of private property are matters adjudicable by writ courts or civil/revenue courts.
Naim
State Of U P
Manoj Misra
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
