Ratnakar Shukla and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

Ratnakar Shukla and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No mandamus issued; petitioners left free to avail the remedy as available in law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners have absolute title over the land/property in dispute (Araji No.1635Ka area 0.0130 hectare and Araji No.1635Kha area 0.8980 hectare, Village-Bhogaon, Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur). +2 more

Court's answer

Whether the petitioners have absolute title over the land/property in dispute is an issue which can be dealt with by the competent civil court; the Court is unable to adjudicate the rights and claim of the petitioners on the basis of the disputed facts.

Ratio / Principle

Highly disputed facts having been placed before the Court, they cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Key takeaways

It is always open to the petitioners to avail the remedy as available in law.ratio¶¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Neutral Citation 2023:AHC:131834-DB — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Division Bench: Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J. and Hon'ble Prashant Kumar, J.), WRIT - C No. 18712 of 2023, Ratnakar Shukla and another v. State of U.P. and 4 others, decided 4.7.2023. The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to utilize their land (Araji No.1635Ka area 0.0130 hectare and Araji No.1635Kha area 0.8980 hectare, Village-Bhogaon, Pargana Kantit (Kon), Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur) under the 'Namami Gange' scheme until acquisition and payment of compensation. The State, through instructions dated 03.07.2023 of the SDM, Mirzapur, stated that the erstwhile owners had consented to construction of a Dharmashala and that Appeal No.708/2010 (Ashwani Kumar and others vs. Vansana Baranwal) was pending before the Consolidation Officer. Holding that highly disputed facts cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and that the question of the petitioners' absolute title falls to be dealt with by the competent civil court, the Division Bench disposed of the writ petition, leaving the petitioners free to avail the remedy available in law.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:131834-DB

Court No. - 40

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18712 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ratnakar Shukla And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

Heard Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following principal reliefs:-

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to utilize the land of petitioners Araji No.1635Ka area 0.0130 hectare and Araji No.1635Kha area 0.8980 hectare situated in Village-Bhogaon, Pargana Kantit (Kon), Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur under the scheme (Namami Gange' till acquirement and giving compensation to the petitioners."

In response to the order dated 30.05.2023, Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has placed the instructions dated 03.07.2023 sent by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mirzapur indicating therein that with intent to provide basic amenities to the public at large, the erstwhile owners of the land have given their consent for construction of Dharmashala. Consequently, the State has carried out developmental activities. He further apprised to the Court that qua the land in question, an appeal bearing Appeal No.708/2010 (Ashwani Kumar and others vs. Vansana Baranwal) is also pending consideration before the Consolidation Officer.

We have the occasion to peruse the record and find that highly disputed facts are being placed before us, which cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Whether petitioners have got absolute title over the land/property in dispute is the issue which can be dealt by the competent civil court, therefore, we are unable to adjudicate the rights and claim of the petitioners on the basis of said disputed facts. However, it is always open for the petitioners to avail the remedy as available in law.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

Order Date :- 4.7.2023 A. Pandey

Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad