Krishna Kumar Katiyar v. State of U.P. and 8 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The petitioner filed a PIL seeking removal of encroachment by anti-social elements and directing authorities to decide pending applications. The Court dismissed the plea, holding that the remedy under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 lies with the Tehsildar.
What did the court decide?
Directing the petitioner to file a representation before the Tehsildar within three months for initiating proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
What the court decided
Court No. - 7
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1001 of 2021
Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Katiyar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Poonam Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Hari Narayan Singh
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner, who is available on audio/video link. Learned Standing Counsel representing respondents-1 to 4 is also available. However, no audio/video link could be established with Mr. Hari Narayan Singh, learned counsel representing respondent-5.
Petitioner has filed present writ petition as PIL claiming following reliefs:-
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent nos.1 to 4 to remove the encroachment of the anti-social elements of the village from Plot No.192 area 0.0510 hectare, Plot No.1 area 0.0510 hectare, Plot No.102D area 0.1130 hectare, Plot No.218 area 0.4810 hectare, Plot No.219Mi area 0.0610 hectare, Plot No.51 area 0.2590 hectare, Plot No.1 area 0.2590 hectare and Plot No.92 area 0.3380 hectare situated in village Gopalpur Shivrajpur, Pargana and Tehsil Bilhaur, District Kanpur Nagar.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court should decide the matter or direct the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Whether the remedy for encroachment lies in administrative proceedings before the Tehsildar rather than in this writ court.
What direction should be issued to dispose of the petition without delay.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Krishna Kumar Katiyar
- respondent
State Of U.P.
- respondent
Respondent no.1 to 4
- respondent
Tehsildar, Tehsil Bilhaur
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- WPIL/1001/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court