Disposed

Om Prakash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2023A482/43107/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a public nuisance case regarding encroachment on a Kachcha Rasta. It directed officials to conduct a spot inspection within a month and ensure immediate removal of the encroachment. The order was handed down under an AHC application.

What did the court decide?

Directed authorities and Police to conduct spot inspection within a month and ensure immediate removal of found encroachments.

Om Prakash Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228795

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43107 of 2023 Applicant :- Om Prakash Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶5

Sri Arvind Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner, requests for expeditious disposal of the Case No. R.S.T. 40 of 2015 (Computerized Case No. T201505200100017) (Om Prakash Vs. Baghela etc.) under Section 133 Cr.P.C.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant matter has been remanded thrice by the first revisional court to the Court of Magistrate for early disposal of the application under Section 133 Cr.P.C.

¶7

In nutshell, dispute is that the respondents no. 2 to 5 encroached upon a Kachcha Rasta by creating a boundary wall and installed a gate which is causing inconvenience to the co-villagers. The Magistrate, before passing any order, referred the matter to the Naib-Tehsildar for seeking enquiry with respect to the possession and ownership right of the disputed place and on enquiry, the Naib-Tehsildar submitted the report, observing that the private respondents have encroached upon public road which is causing inconvenience to the other co-villagers as obstructing their movement.

¶8

In view of above, the Naib-Tehsildar and S.H.O. concerned are directed to conduct a spot inspection of the place in question, together and do the needful within a month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The spot inspection shall be conducted in

¶9

presence of the Police and the S.D.M. shall ensure that the encroachment, if any found, shall immediately be removed. For execution of this order, Superintendent of Police will ensure presence of sufficient Police force as he may deem necessary and adequate.

¶10

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 2.12.2023

¶12

P.Sri.

¶13

(Vinod Diwakar, J.)

¶14

Digitally signed by :- PUNEET SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Om Prakash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Rajpati Giri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Bakshi Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Sanjay Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Istiyak and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Diksha Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Shiv Kumar Pandey @ Munna Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.