Disposed

Raju and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023WPIL/2670/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation concerning public utility land plots. The court directed the Tehsildar to decide proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within six months after a hearing, following the filing of instructions by State counsel.

What did the court decide?

The Respondent no.4 Tehsildar directed to decide the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within six months after hearing.

Raju and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 15… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229518

¶2

Court No. - 51

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2670 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Raju And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 15 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶6

Heard Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Shridhar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, for respondent no. 5, Gaon Sabha.

¶7

In compliance of the order of this Court, instruction dated 30.11.2023 is placed by Mr. Shridhar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents before the Court which is taken on record.

¶8

Mr. Shridhar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents on the basis of the instruction submitted that plot Nos. 437, 438, 439 and 444 are recorded as public utility land. He further submitted that certain persons are in possession over the aforementioned plots accordingly proceeding under Section 67 (1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 have been registered in respect to the plot in question. He further submitted that plot No. 444 area 0.028 hectare is recorded as saurahan in the revenue record and there is no encroachment over the same. He further submitted that eight cases have been registered against the persons who are in possession over the same. The particulars of the case numbers are as follows:-

¶9

(a) T202315510404877

¶10

(b) T202315510404975

¶11

¶12

(d) T202315510404974

¶13

(e) T202315510404882

¶14

(f) T202315510404881

¶15

(g) T202315510404879

¶16

(h) T202315510404976

¶17

Counsel for the petitioners submitted that appropriate direction be issued for the expeditious disposal of the aforementioned pending cases.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances, the instant public interest litigation is finally disposed of directing the respondent no.4, Tehsildar, Tehsil Mohammadabad Gohna, District Mau to decide the aforementioned proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties within period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.12.2023 Vandana Y.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raju and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 15 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

Khursheed Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Paramhansh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Krishna Kant and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Gauri Shankar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sujeet Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dashrath Vs Sheo Babu Yadav and 4 Others