Disposed

Om Prakash v. State of U.P. and 10 Others

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023WPIL/315/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court examined a PIL regarding encroachment on land covered by Plot No. 43, Punchayat Bhawan. It directed the relevant authority to conclude pending proceedings against three encroachers within eight months after giving them due notice, while retaining the power to issue fresh notices for other encroachers.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 4 to conclude proceedings against three registered encroachers within 8 months after giving due notice.

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 315 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Om Prakash Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhaju Ram Pprasad Sharma,Arvind Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti

¶5

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶6

Heard Shri B.R.P. Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Abhinit Jaiswal, learned counsel representing the state respondents, and Shri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel representing the respondent no. 5.

¶7

The grievance raised through present writ petition is that action be taken against the encroachment made by the private respondents over the land covered by plot no. 43 which is recorded as Punchayat Bhawan situated in village Jamuhara Kala (Haveli), Tehsil Nautanwa, District Maharajganj.

¶8

It has been prayed that proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code 2006, should be initiated against the private respondents/encroachers and thereafter the encroachment be removed.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has produced instructions supplied by Tehsildar and Sub-Divisional Officer concerned, which are taken on record.

¶10

Perusal of instructions would show that proceedings under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code 2006, covered by case Nos. T201905470303033 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Baijnath), T202205470304593 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Yogendra Chaudari), T202205470304594 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Ravindar Chaudhari), have already been registered and therefore, it is submitted by learned

¶11

standing counsel that since 08.02.2023, the date fixed in the matter, no interference is warranted in the present writ petition.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aforesaid cases have been registered against only three persons whereas, there are many other persons who are the encroachers over the aforesaid land and therefore, relief claimed in the writ petition against all the said encroachers, who have been arrayed as private respondents, may be granted.

¶13

This court has perused Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006, sub-Section (2) whereof clearly provides that there from the information received under Sub-Section (1) or otherwise, the Assistant Collector is satisfied that any property referred to in SubSection (1), has been damaged or misappropriated or any person is in occupation of any land prefer to enlight Sub-Section in contravention of the provisions of this Code, he shall issue notice to the persons concerned to show cause while compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation, not exceeding the amount stated in the notice be not recovered from him and why they should not be evicted from such land.

¶14

Taking aid of Section 66(2) of U.P. Revenue Code-2006, learned standing counsel submits that it is to the satisfaction of the parties to issue notice to the persons who are found to encroach upon the land of the Gaon Sabha and therefore, whatever cases have been registered, the same are sufficient.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 4 to conclude the proceedings of above noted three cases, after given due opportunity of hearing to the noticees/opposite parties in the said proceedings within a period of 8 months from today.

¶16

In case, during the course of deciding the matter, any other person is found to be in the capacity of encroacher, it would be in the wisdom of the authorities to issue fresh notices to such persons and therefore, at this stage, no further comment is being made and the petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶17

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 Suraj

¶18

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

Om Prakash v. State of U.P. and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash v. State of U.P. and 10 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

Virendra Kumar Rai Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hari Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Leellu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ishwar Chand and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ismail Khan Vs State of U P and 7 Others

Tairunnesha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others