Public Interest Litigation where the petitioner requested dismissal without pressing the grounds due to non-disclosure of PIL credentials. The issue was decided without making any substantive legal ruling on the merits or the statutory requirement itself.
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.
Court No. - 3 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 579 of 2023
Petitioner :- Devata Deen Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lucknow And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramendra Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.
Heard Shri Ramendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hargovind Upadhyaya, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties no.1 to 5 and Shri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondents no.6 and 7.
Present petition has been filed as public interest litigation with the following relief :-
(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the opposite parties not to cause damage/ cut the green trees standing over the land of gata no.130/0.3570 and 131/0.5920 hectare situated at village - Melhua, Pargana - Dalmau, Tehsil Dalmau, District Raebareli."
At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present Public Interest Litigation as the petitioner has not disclosed the credentials and other details that are required under Sub-Rule (3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XII of the Allahabad High Court Rules (Rules of the Court, 1952), which has been amended in the light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Uttranchal versus Balwant Singh Chaufal & Others reported in 2010 AIR SCW 1029.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that at this stage, he does not want to press this petition and the same may be dismissed as not pressed with the liberty granted to the petitioner to file a fresh petition with proper particulars.
The prayer so made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as not pressed with the aforesaid liberty.
Order Date :- 20.6.2023 mks
Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Uttranchal versus Balwant Singh Chaufal & OthersReferred¶8
State of Uttranchal versus Balwant Singh Chaufal & Others reported in 2010 AIR SCW 1029 · Who else cites this
Devata Deen
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lucknow
Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
