In a PIL regarding unauthorized encroachment on Khasra No.684, the court dismissed the petition as misconceived. Finding the land was recorded as 'abadi' and not 'Khalihan', the court held no case for removal of encroachment was made out.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:202020
Court No. - 51
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 220 of 2023
Petitioner :- Urmila Devi Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pal,Amar Jeet Upadhyay,Pradeep Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kuber Singh Yadav
Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
Order Date :- 18.10.2023/Rameez
Digitally signed by :- RAMEEZ AHMED High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether mandamus can be issued to remove unauthorized encroachment from land recorded as abadi in revenue records.
Whether the petitioners have made out a case for removal of encroachment from the disputed plot.
Urmila Devi
State Of U P
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Respondent No. 4
Chandra Kumar Rai
Rameez Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
