The court dismissed a PIL challenging an order transferring a village goshala to the Nagar Palika. It held that the petition lacked merit because the petitioner failed to disclose required credentials and relied merely on apprehension of overburdening.
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. - 1
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 96 of 2023
Petitioner :- Heera Lal And Others
Respondent :- D.M. , Bahraich And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Baljeet Singh,Anupam Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta,Rakesh Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
Heard Shri Anupam Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Anil Kumar Singh Visen, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 and 2, Shri Rakesh Pratap Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent no.3 and Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent no.4.
The instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioners with the following reliefs :-
" I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the order dated 6.8.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 (contained herewith as Annexure no. 1 to this writ petition).
II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondents to not interfere in the operation of proposed Goshala of Village Panchayat Mohammad Nagar and the same be reserved only for the purpose of keeping the stray animals of Village Panchayat.
III. Pass any other order or direction which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper as per circumstances of case in favour of petitioners.
IV. Allow this writ petition with cost."
The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that by passing the impugned order dated 06.08.2022, the respondent no.2-Block Development Officer, Block Chittora, Tahsil Sadar, District Bahraich, on the instructions of District
Magistrate, Bahraich, had not only encroached over the domain of village panchayat but also causing a threat that in future the capacity of goshala will be overburdened by keeping the stray animals of city Bahraich in the said goshala, which will frustrate the resolution dated 8.5.2022 passed by village panchayat Mohammad Nagar as well as the purpose of resolution dated 8.5.2022 passed by Village Panchayat Mohammad Nagar. He also submitted that in case the impugned order dated 6.8.2022 is complied with, there is every possibility that the stray animals of Bahraich City will be placed here and as the village panchayat Mohammad Nagar had been outsted from its operation, the stray animals of village panchayat will roam in the vicinity of village and they will be destroying the crops of villagers. He has further stated that the said goshala is being constructed only with the capacity of holding 40 animals, there is very much likelihood that the said goshala be overburdened and the lives of children of the primary school will be under constant threat.
The learned Standing Counsel has opposed the aforesaid contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and states that the instant writ petition is nothing but it has been filed on the apprehension that the said goshala be overburdened. Moreso, the petitioner has not disclosed his credentials as per the dictum of the Apex Court rendered in State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal : 2010 (3) SCC 402 as well as Rules of the Court, hence the instant public interest litigation is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
We have examined the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned order as well as material brought on record.
By means of the impugned order dated 06.08.2022, the Block
Development Officer transferred the Goshala to the respondent no.3-Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Bahraich on the direction of the District Magistrate, Bahraich and no illegality has been pointed out in the aforesaid action.
The contention raised by the petitioner in the instant writ petition appears to be on the basis of a mere apprehension that the goshala will be over burdened thereby causing a threat of the stray animals of the village panchayat area roaming around outside. Moreso, the petitioner has not disclosed his credential as required under under Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules
In view of the aforesaid, the instant writ petition lacks merit and, accordingly, it is dismissed .
(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 10.2.2023 Ajit/-
Digitally signed by :- AJIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the public interest litigation lacking proper credentials of the petitioner should be dismissed.
Whether the mere apprehension that a goshala will be overburdened constitutes sufficient cause for quashing an administrative order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh ChaufalReferred¶14
State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal : 2010 (3) SCC 402 · Who else cites this
Heera Lal And Others
D.M. Bahraich And Others
Ramesh Sinha
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
