Dismissed

Haridvar Singh Kushwaha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2022WPIL/293/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL regarding illegal encroachment, the High Court held the petition not maintainable due to available alternative remedy. The court permitted the petitioner to approach the competent authority under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

What did the court decide?

PIL disposed; petitioner permitted to avail statutory remedy under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within three weeks.

Haridvar Singh Kushwaha and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 293 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Haridvar Singh Kushwaha And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Srivastava,Praveen Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi , learned counsel for the respondentNo.5

¶6

The petitioner has preferred the present Public Interest Litigation (P.I.L.) with the following prayer:-

¶7

“(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent authority to take appropriate action in view of Section 25, 26 and 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for removing the illegal encroachment from the plot No.1121 area 0.1740 recorded as “chakroad” situated in Village-Susundi, Tehsil-Sadar, District-Ghazipur and to restore the same in its original form, within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.”

¶8

It is argued that in this regard an application dated 04.12.2021 has already been submitted before respondent No3 & 4 copy of which is appended as Annexure No4 to the present P.I.L. but till date the encroachment has not been removed.

¶9

On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that the present P.I.L. is not maintainable as the alternative remedy has been available to the petitioner to initiate the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code before the competent authority and the petitioner must have been avail the aforesaid alternative statutory remedy. It is argued by learned counsel for respondent that Sub Rule 6 of Rule 67 of Code Rules, 2016 provided that the authority concerned shall make an endevour to conclude the proceedings initiated under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of show cause notice. The aforesaid Rule is quoted below:-

¶10

"(6) The Assistant Collector shall make an endeavour to conclude the proceeding under section 67 of the Code within the period of ninety days from the date of issuance of the show cause notice and if the proceeding is not concluded within

¶11

such period the reasons for the same shall be recorded."

¶12

He further argued that if the petitioner will avail the aforesaid remedy, the concerned authority will decide the same within time as provided Sub Rule 6 of Rule 67 of Code Rules, 2016.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this P.I.L. is disposed of permitting the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy by filing an application as provided under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the concerned competent authority within a period of three weeks from today. If such a proceeding is initiated, the concerned competent authority is directed to conclude the proceeding within the time limit as provided Sub Rule 6 of Rule 67 of Code Rules, 2016 after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, if there is no legal impediment.

¶15

Order Date :- 22.3.2022 saqlain

¶16

Digitally signed by SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER Date: 2022.03.23 09:45:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Haridvar Singh Kushwaha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haridvar Singh Kushwaha and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Seetaram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Piyare Singh Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Mohd. Rahis Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Mewa Lal Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Shravan Kumar Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others