Dismissed

Rajbali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Jul 2023WRIC/11922/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking possession of allotted land or compensation alleging failure by State to deliver possession. Court directed the competent respondent to initiate an enquiry to ascertain allotment details and finality before taking action.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh representation with the instant order copy before respondent no. 3 within two weeks for an enquiry to ascertain correctness of petitioner's claim.

Rajbali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140916-DB

¶2

Court No. - 21

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11922 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Rajbali Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Samsad Ahmed Khan Counsel for Respondent :- CSC

¶5

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.

¶6

1. The instant petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to hand over physical possession of Khasra No. 145, measuring 0.0510 hectare, Khasra No. 155M, measuring 0.0650 hectare and Khasra No. 142Kha, measuring 0.0780 hectare, Village Kansapur, Tehsil Gyanpur, District Bhadohi, or to pay compensation according to law.

¶7

2. According to the petitioner, the State respondents had taken over possession of his bhumidhari land comprising of Arzai No. 338M, area 0.174 hectare, for construction of houses under Manniya Kansi Ram Ji Shehri Garib Awas Yojana and in lieu thereof, allotted Arazi No. 145, area 0.031 hectare, Arzai No. 155, area 0.065 hectare and Arazi No. 142Kha, area 0.078 hectare, total three plots (total area 0.174 hectare, earlier recorded as ' Usar '). The name of the petitioner also came to be recorded in the khatauni of 1414 - 1419 fasli, but the said land is in unauthorized possession of various persons and the State respondents have failed to hand over possession of the same to the petitioner. The petitioner has filed repeated representations to the Authorities to ensure delivery of possession, but no action has been taken, therefore the instant petition has been filed.

¶8

3. Sri Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, appearing for the State respondents, submits that respondent no. 3 is competent to examine the grievance of the petitioner.

¶9

4. Accordingly, we dispose of the instant petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with true attested copy of the instant order before respondent no. 3 within two weeks from today. Respondent no. 3 will thereafter cause an enquiry to be made and ascertain whether the contention of the petitioner is correct or not and if he comes to the conclusion that the petitioner was allotted the aforesaid land in lieu of his own land and the order allotting the land has attained finality, he will take appropriate measures in accordance with law to ensure that the possession of the said land is handed over to the petitioner, or if for any reason, such course is not possible, ensure payment of adequate compensation.

¶10

(Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶11

Order Date :- 17.7.2023 Jaideep/-

¶12

Digitally signed by :- JAIDEEP BANERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajbali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajbali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Asare Chaudhary Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Trilok Singh Chima Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gulab Kali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohmmad Aftab Alam and 5 Others Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate / Deputy Collector and 5 Others

Suresh Kumar and 31 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Parmsheela @ Premsheel Vs State of U.P. and 14 Others