The petitioner requested the High Court to direct authorities to construct a Panchayat Bhawan on a specific plot (Gata No. 127). The bench dismissed the PIL, holding that it is not the court's role to specify the location; instead, relevant authorities must choose the best suitable place.
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.
Chief Justice's Court Serial No. 8
**HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD *****
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1671 of 2022
Ram Prasad .....Petitioner
Through :- Mr. Vimal Kumar, Advocate
v/s
State of U.P. and others
.....Respondents
Through :- Mr. A.K. Roy, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 to 6, Mr. Hari Narayan Singh, Advocate for respondent no. 7
CORAM : HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, JUDGE
ORDER
3. Dismissed.
(J.J. Munir) (Rajesh Bindal) Judge Chief Justice
Allahabad
16.09.2022 Manish Himwan/P.Sri.
Whether the order is speaking : No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No
Digitally signed by MANISH HIMWAN Date: 2022.09.27 17:20:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can direct authorities to construct Panchayat Bhawan at the place specified by the petitioner?
Whether the petitioner's contention regarding the specific gata number should be accepted?
What is the court's role in determining the suitable place for Panchayat Bhawan construction?
Ram Prasad
State of U.P.
Rajesh Bindal
J.J. Munir
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
