Disposed

Ganesh Dutt Shukla v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2022WPIL/410/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a PIL seeking removal of illegal encroachment over agricultural land recorded as pond areas. This court disposed of the PIL by permitting the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Permission to file proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code within three weeks; respondent authority directed to conclude within prescribed time.

Ganesh Dutt Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 15 Others — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 410 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Ganesh Dutt Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 15 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the respondent No.16

¶6

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

¶7

"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to remove the illegal encroachment over the Arazi no. 102G, 104 K, 107, 123 and 158 which was recorded as pond consisting areas. 0.3000, 0.0040, 0.0240, 0.4210, 0.0480 hectare respectively in the entire revenue records and to restrain the respondent nos. 4 to 15."

¶8

Today when the matter is taken up, learned Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection 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:-

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this P.I.L. is disposed of permitting the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy as provided under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 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.

¶13

Order Date :- 23.3.2022 saqlain

¶14

Digitally signed by SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER Date: 2022.03.24 09:38:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ganesh Dutt Shukla v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Dutt Shukla v. State of U.P. and 15 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

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

Smt. Kiran Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bechani Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vindu Lata Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others