Disposed

Raseed v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2022WRIC/32699/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a dispute regarding the demarcation between plot no. 311 and 312 must be resolved before construction. It directed the second respondent to issue directions for Sub-Divisional Magistrate to determine the boundary via settlement under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within six weeks. The interim protection granted earlier was continued. The court dismissed the writ pe

What did the court decide?

The Second Respondent to issue necessary directions and ensure that actual demarcation is undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within six weeks. Int

Raseed Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Municipal and Town Planning | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 32699 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Raseed Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Singh,Ashwani Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Petitioner is aggrieved by construction of Panchayat Bhawan in village Bartauli, Pargana and Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahar on the ground that the authorities without demarcating petitioner's plot have commenced construction on the land of plot no. 312, which is his bhumidhari land. It is stated in the garb of commencing construction over plot no. 311 the authorities are actually encroaching upon the land of petitioner over plot no.312. Khatauni has been annexed with the writ petition as per which the petitioner is recorded over plot no. 312.

¶6

While entertaining the writ petition following orders were passed in the matter on 08.12.2021:-

¶7

"The petitioner, by means of the instant writ petition, prays that the Gaon Sabha may not use plot no.312, which is the petitioner's bhumidhari land, for the construction of Panchayat Ghar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the Khatauni, it is evident that plot no.312 is the bhumidhari land of the petitioner.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel to take instructions as to where the Panchayat Ghar is being constructed.

¶9

Place this petition on 12.1.2022 as fresh.

¶10

Till the next date of listing, no construction shall be made over plot no.312. It shall, however, be open for the Gaon Sabha to construct the Panchayat Ghar over its own land."

¶11

Matter was again adjourned while passing following orders on 12.01.2022

¶12

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents through vedio conferencing.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted two weeks further time to seek instruction as directed by this Court vide order dated 8.12.2021. Put up this case as fresh on 27.1.2022.

¶14

Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of listing."

¶15

Despite grant of sufficient opportunity, learned Standing Counsel has not been able to obtain instructions.

¶16

Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed the Court is not inclined to adjourned the matter any further.

¶17

From the records made available it transpires that there is an issue with regard to demarcation/ identity of plot no. 311 vis-avis plot no. 312. While plot no. 311, area 0.102 Hectare is recorded as Navin Parti in the revenue records, the adjacent plot no. 312 is recorded in the name of the petitioner. Such issues of demarcation can always be got determined by the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate with reference to his powers conferred under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶18

In the facts and circumstances, this petition stands disposed of with the direction upon the second respondent to issue necessary directions and ensure that the actual demarcation of plot/land in terms of above observation is got undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, after following the procedure specified in the Code of 2006 read with Rules of 2016, within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of a copy of this order. Interim protection granted in the present writ petition on 08.12.2021 shall continue and abide by the proceedings for demarcation to be undertaken in terms of this order. Based upon the proceedings so undertaken it shall be open for the authorities to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶19

Order Date :- 27.1.2022 Abhishek Singh

Raseed v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raseed v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Sangeeta Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Surbhi Sharma and 4 Others Vs Union of India and 4 Others

Vandita and 7 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Neeraj Kumar Singh Vs State of Up and 2 Others

Lal Ji Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vijay Bahadur and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others