Ramji Lal Srivastava v. State of U.P. and 8 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35453 of 2021…
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35453 of 2021…
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. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35453 of 2021
Petitioner :- Ramji Lal Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The instant writ petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding respondent no.3 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 04.08.2021. In the said application, petitioner has alleged that private respondent nos.5 to 9 have made illegal encroachment of his abadi existing over Gata No.185 (m) area 0.063 hectare, Village Jagdishpur (Kantit) Lalganj Mirzapur, District Mirzapur and has prayed for removal of encroachments made by the private respondents.
In our considered opinion, dispute of such nature cannot be decided by respondent no.3 on the basis of representation made by the petitioner in absence of any duly constituted proceeding.
Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with liberty to petitioner to avail such other remedy as may be available to him under law.
(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.)
Order Date :- 27.1.2022 Ajeet
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent (Di Officer) can decide on encroachment application based solely on a representation without a formal proceeding.
Ramji Lal Srivastava
State Of U.P.
Manoj Kumar Gupta
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court