In a PIL concerning alleged illegal encroachment of government land, the High Court observed that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
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:198411
Court No. - 38
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2393 of 2023
Petitioner :- Kajal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Gautam,Tiwari Ajay Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
Order Date :- 13.10.2023 Deepak/
Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner must exhaust the alternative remedy under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before filing this writ petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kajal Singh
State Of U.P.
Ashutosh Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
