Dismissed¶11

Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2023/12/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. 12 of 2023; Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P.; review of order dated 02.01.2023 dismissing Writ-C No.9370 of 2022; alternative remedy; maintainability of writ petition; Section 134 Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006; ejectment of persons occupying land without title; bhumidar; bhumidari land; nala construction; damages; State Government and Gram Panchayat necessary parties; no error apparent on face of record; review petition dismissed; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Ramesh Sinha J.; Subhash Vidyarthi J.; Shailendra Singh Rajawat; Standing Counsel.

What did the court decide?

There is no error in the order dated 02.01.2023; the order is apparent on the face of the record and calls for no interference in review. ¶11

Arvind Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 12 of 2023 Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Singh Rajawat Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶3

Heard Mr. Shailendra Singh Rajawat, learned counsel for the review petitioner and perused the records.

¶4

The writ petition had been filed seeking a direction to the opposite parties not to construct a nala over the petitioner's bhumidari land.

¶5

The instant application has been filed seeking review of the order dated 02.01.2023, whereby Writ-C No.9370 of 2022 had been dismissed. Section 134 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is as follows:-

¶6

" Ejectment of persons occupying land without title-

¶7

(1) Where a person takes or retains possession of any land forming part of the holding of any bhumidar or asami otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the law for the time being in force and without the consent of such bhumidar or asami, such person shall be liable to ejectment on the suit of the bhumidar or asami concerned, and shall also be liable to pay damages at the rate prescribed.

¶8

(2) To every suit relating to any land referred to in sub-section (1), the State Government and Gram Panchayat shall be impleaded as necessary parties."

¶9

The aforesaid Section contains a provision under which the petitioner can seek redressal for his grievance and, therefore, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.

¶10

After taking into consideration, the objection raised by the learned Standing Counsel regarding maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner is having an alternative remedy before the appropriate forum, the writ petition was dismissed.

¶11

We do not find any error in the order dated 02.01.2023 which is an apparent on the face of the record. The review petition lacks merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶12

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)

¶13

Order Date :- 3.2.2023 Preeti

¶14

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Chief General Manager Telcom U.P. Lucknow Vs R.K.Bajpai

In Reunruly BEHAVIOURandBREACH of Protocol During Awadh Bar Vs Awadh Bar Association Lucknow

U.P. Senior Basic Shikshak Mahasabha Thru. President, Ankur Chaudhari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. and 2 Others

Adhivakta Sangharsh Samiti Pratapgarh Vs Hon Ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Thr.R.G.and Ors.

Jagdish Kumar Gautam Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of North Railway and Anr.

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Horticulture and Food Processing Govt. U.P. Lko. and Ors. Vs Indra Pal