Partly allowed

Ram Adhar v. State of U P and 7 Others

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2021WPIL/98/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, the petitioner sought eviction of illegal encroachment. The Court held that the petition was not maintainable against six and seven respondents who had died without substitution, and dismissed the petition against respondents four, five, and eight.

What did the court decide?

Dismissing the writ petition against respondents six and seven as not maintainable; dismissing against respondents four, five, and eight.

Ram Adhar Vs State of U P and 7 Others — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 98 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Ram Adhar Respondent :- State Of U P And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Imtiyaj Ali Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Safiullah

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Imtiyaj Ali, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Safiullah, learned counsel representing respondent 4 are available on audio/video link. Learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1, 2 and 3 is also available.

¶6

Petitioner Ram Adhar has approached this Court by means of present writ petition which has been filed as PIL for following relief:-

¶7

"(I) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 1st set to remove illegal encroachment from over land of plot no.733 area 0.162 hectares situate in Village-Sisvan Gopal, ParganaSidhuwajobna, Tehsil-Khadda, District-Kushi Nagar and set it free for use of public at large at the earliest or within the period stipulated by this Hon'ble Court;

¶8

(II) issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶9

(III) award the cost of present writ petition. "

¶10

The present writ petition come up for admission on 1.2.2021 and this Court passed following order:-

¶11

"Learned Standing counsel is directed to seek instructions in the matter with respect to the order dated 15.9.2000 passed against the private respondent in the proceedings under Section 122-B of U.P. Z.A.& L.R. Act has been implemented or not.

¶12

Put up this matter again on 15th February, 2021 as fresh before appropriate Bench."

¶13

Pursuant to the order dated 1.2.2021 referred to above, learned Standing Counsel submits that he has received requisite instructions. He contends that proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were initiated. Orders of eviection

¶14

have been passed and now appeals are pending. Consequently, no eviction exercise can be undertaken. It is next submitted that on account of above present writ petition which has been filed as a PIL is not maintainable as there is no inaction on part of State respondents. On the aforesaid premise, he submits that present writ petition which has been filed as PIL is not maintainable, as parallel proceedings for same cause of action is prohibited in law.

¶15

Mr. Safiullah, learned counsel representing respondents 6 and 7 submits that respondents 6 and 7 have died prior to the institution of present writ petition. Thus, writ petition has been filed against dead persons. No substitution application has been filed till date. Consequently, relief as prayed for against respondents 6 & 7 cannot be granted.

¶16

When confronted with above, learned counsel for petitioner could not over come the same.

¶17

Consequently, the present writ petition in so far as relates to respondents 6 & 7 is hereby dismissed as not maintainable. In respect of respondents 4, 5 & 8 the writ petition shall stand dismissed.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.7.2021 piyush

Ram Adhar v. State of U P and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Adhar v. State of U P and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaylal Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 5 Others

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Abhay Pal Singh and Another Vs District Deputy Director of Consolidation and 3 Others

Manveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Sentu Kumar Vs Board O Revenue and 12 Others

Rajpal Singh Vs Additional Commissioner and 2 Others