Dismissed

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2022WRIB/11177/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking prohibition against State interference with the petitioner's possession over land settled in his favour under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, holding that the final order of 25.04.1997 precludes such interference.

What did the court decide?

Directions that State respondents shall not interfere with the petitioner's possession of plot Nos. 119/120 Situated in Sherpur village, District-Mahamayanagar.

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 11177 of 1998

¶3

Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tripathi B.G. Bhai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, holding the brief of Mr. Tripathi B.G. Bhai, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.

¶6

The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶7

"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition, directing the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land in dispute of plot No.119/120 Village-Sherpur, which is already settled in favour of the petitioner through order dated 25.04.1997, passed by respondent no.3 in proceeding under Section122-B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act.

¶8

(II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition directing the respondents, not to allot the aforesaid land in favour of any other persons.

¶9

(III) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to protect the life and property of the petitioner to provide assistance in accordance with law.

¶10

(IV) Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

¶11

(V) To award the cost of the petition to the petitioner."

¶12

The Court vide order dated 05.04.1998 passed the following order:

¶13

"Learned Standing Counsel will seed instruction within two weeks. List this case on 05.05.1998.

¶14

Till next listing of the case, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed otherwise than in accordance with law."

¶15

In pursuance of the order dated 05.04.1998, neither counter affidavit nor instruction has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner belongs to scheduled caste community and was in possession over the land in dispute since before 03.06.1995. He further submitted that proceeding under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A.& L.R. was initiated against the petitioner in respect of plot no. 119/120 situated in village Sherpur, Mahamayanagar and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and after considering the evidence of record, Tehsildar/Assistant Collector vide order dated 25.04.1997 withdrew the notice 49-ka and dropped the proceeding against the petitioner recording the finding of fact that petitioner belongs to scheduled caste community and he is in the possession since before 3.6.1995 as such petitioner cannot be evicted from the plot in dispute rather authorities will take steps to settle the plot in his favour. The order dated 25.04.1997, has attained finality and no appeal or revision has been filed against the order dated 25.04.1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted that the interference was made with the right of the petitioner at the instance of respondent Nos. 6 and 4. Hence the present petition was filed and interim protection was granted in favour of the petitioner as such petitioner is continued in possession over the plot in dispute.

¶17

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case specially that order dated 25.04.1997 has attained finality, as such no interference can be made with the right and possession of the petitioner in respect of the plot in dispute. Since no appeal or revision has been filed against the order dated 25.04.1997

¶18

passed by Tehsildar/Assistant Collector under Section 122 B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, as such State respondents cannot interfere in the possession of the petitioner with respect to the land in dispute. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that State respondents shall not interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the plot Nos.119/120 situated in Sherpur village, District-Mahamayanagar.

¶19

Order Date :- 19.9.2022 PS*

¶20

Digitally signed by PRITI SHARMA Date: 2022.09.19 18:13:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. and 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

Dev Sharma and 17 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manoj Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Lallan Prasad Yadav Vs the State of U.P. and 17 Others

T. Ram and Others Vs B.R. and Others

Ranche Vs Board of Revenue and Othaers

Jawahar and Another Vs Collector Badaun and Others