Petitioners alleged State authorities encroached their land to construct a road. Court observed dispute centered on land demarcation. Finding statutory remedy exists under U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, Court dismissed petition.
Petition disposed of; petitioner directed to pursue challenge under Section 24 (4) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
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. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12917 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sarva Dutt Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shrawan Kumar Pandey,Sanjay Kumar Singh,Tarun Kumar Sahu Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
This petition has been filed with the grievance that without any acquisition, the State authorities has encroached upon the petitioners' land and have constructed a road.
A counter affidavit has been filed in which it is stated that petitioners plot abuts a link road no.213 and that petitioner had actually encroached upon the land of the road.
A rejoinder affidavit has been filed disputing the averments made in the counter affidavit.
From the materials placed on record, we find that the dispute in essence is with regard to demarcation of petitioners' land for which proceedings have already been initiated by the petitioner.
It appears that some orders against the petitioners in demarcation proceedings have been passed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners state that demarcation has not been correctly undertaken.
If that be so, remedy of the petitioner would be to challenge such order in appropriate proceedings contemplated under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006
The legality of the demarcation order passed under Section 24 is not required to be examined by this Court, particularly as a statutory remedy is available and the demarcation order is otherwise not assailed.
Leaving it open for the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedy under Section 24 (4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, this petition stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 Bhaskar
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition possessory in nature regarding land encroachment and road construction should be allowed in absence of specific acquisition proceedings.
Whether the appropriate remedy for disputed demarcation lies under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 rather than through this writ petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sarva Dutt Singh And 2 Others
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Vikram D. Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
