The High Court directed State authorities not to interfere with the petitioner's possession of a residential plot allotted in 1976, noting the allotment remained uncancelled and the State lacked title to disrupt possession.
Directed State respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's possession of the disputed plot in any manner.
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. - 52
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13400 of 2022
Petitioner :- Kiran Devi Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sunil Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Mr Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.6.
The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
"(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents authorities concerned not to dispossess the petitioner in the peaceful possession over the allotted Residential Lease/Patta bearing Gata No.98 (206 old) measuring area 100 sq. yard (warg gaj) out of 0.0650 hectare situated in village-Ahmadpur, Pargana-Hapur, Tehsil and District-Hapur.
(b) issue any other suitable order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.
(c) award cost of the petition to the petitioner."
This Court vide order dated 17.05.2022 and 15.07.2022 directed the Standing counsel to obtain instruction in the matter.
Instruction has been placed before this Court, which has been perused by this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that plot in dispute No.98 (206 old) measuring area 100sq. yard out of 0.0650 hectare has been allotted to the father-in-law of the petitioner in the year 1976 for residential purpose. The possession of the plot was also given to the petitioner in the year 1976 copy of the allotment as well as possession letter have been annexed as Annexure Nos.2 and 3 to the writ petition. He further submitted that after the death of the father-in-law of the petitioner, petitioner's name came in the plot in dispute. He next submitted that lease has not been cancelled by any Court and the petitioner is in possession of the same by constructing the house on the allotted land. Accordingly, he prayed that the authorities be restrained from interfering in the possession of the petitioner in respect to the land, which was allotted to the petitioner's
ancestor in the year 1976.
In the supplementary affidavit it has been specifically stated that the authorities are interfering with the possession of the petitioner.
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel stated that plot in dispute has been allotted to the petitioner for residential purpose and the possession has been transferred to the petitioner and there is no interference with the rights and possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that if there is any interference then the petitioner should approach the civil court for redressal of her grievance.
I have considered the arrangements advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
There is no dispute about the fact that the plot in dispute has been allotted to the petitioner in the year 1976 and the allotment has not been cancelled in any proceeding as such State authorities are not entitled to interfere with the possession of petitioner in respect to disputed plot.
In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the instructions of the Standing Counsel placed before the Court, it is directed that State respondents shall not interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect to the plot in dispute (Plot No.98 area 100 sq. yard out of 0.0650 hectare) situated in village Ahmadpur, Pargana-Hapur, Tehsil and District-Hapur in any manner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 13.9.2022 PS*
Digitally signed by PRITI SHARMA Date: 2022.09.13 18:23:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether State authorities are entitled to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession of an allotted residential lease that was granted to her father-in-law.
Kiran Devi
State Of U P
Chandra Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
