Allowed

Ruab Ali and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2023WRIC/2902/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court quashed a notice regarding a boundary dispute between petitioners and the State, reasoning that a separate proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 was already pending. The court directed the authorities to proceed with the Section 67 case strictly according to the Code and rules.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 13.01.2023 was quashed. The matter was remanded to be decided under Section 67 of the Code.

Ruab Ali and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2902 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Ruab Ali And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tripathi B.G. Bhai,Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Instructions supplied by learned Standing Counsel are taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Tripathi B.G. Bhai, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent-Gaon Sabha.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned notice dated 13.01.2023 issued by the respondent no.3-Tehsildar, TehsilDumariyaganj, District-Siddharth Nagar.

¶8

This Court while entertaining the present writ petition passed the following order on 02.02.2023:-

¶9

"Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that house in question has been built for arazi no.313 Kha and no portion of the house in question is built on any other land. The khatauni in respect of the title of the petitioners has been placed at page-20 of the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that they have not encroached upon any other land as house has been built on the land of the petitioners.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel submits that the house in question has been constructed on the Gram Sabha land being Gata Nos.312 and 310. In the present case, the dispute pertains to the boundary and a fair stand has been taken by learned counsel for the petitioners that their house stands on Khata No.313 Kha. Once the title is vested in the land of arazi no.313 Kha, the respondents cannot disturb the same.

¶11

Under the circumstances, keeping in view the stand of both the parties, it is hereby directed that respondent no.2 (District Magistrate) shall ensure the survey/demarcation of the land of the petitioners being arazi no.313 Kha is conducted. The District Magistrate shall submit a report of survey before this Court, within two weeks.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly states that in case any land is beyond the arazi no.313 Kha, they will not object to the survey.

¶13

However, the demolition shall be carried after the report is submitted before this Court. While preparing the report with regard to survey, the petitioners shall remain present.

¶14

Put up as fresh on 17.02.2023.

¶15

In the meanwhile, as an interim measure, till the report is submitted before this Court, the demolition proceedings, shall remain in abeyance. "

¶16

A perusal of order sheet shows that the contention of the petitioner is to the effect that his house stands on Araji No.313-Kha whereas the stand of the State is that the house in question has been constructed on the Gram Sabha land.

¶17

A perusal of the instructions filed today shows that the Tehsildar-Tehsil Dumariyaganj, District-Siddharth Nagar has reported to the following effect:-

¶18

"गाटासंख्या-312 रकबा 0.1170 हेꕰ腙राजस्聱滃अभि�ले淲䨃म宮䧣बंजरकेरूⷍᯓम宮䧣दज� है❝ᒳउᓰᒓगाटेⷍᯓरअ聱滃ै풇कब्जेक뢙쇿भि#कायꗼ鵅्ቚ ा詾誚होनेⷍᯓरराजस्聱滃टीम्ቛ ारास्थलीय 聱滃अभि�ले淲䨃ीयजां䥱䧽क뢙쇿गयीꗼ鵅थागाटासंꕰ腙-312 क뢙쇿ⷍᯓैमाइ# क뢙쇿गयी❝ᒳⷍᯓैमाइ# के ⷍᯓ्ቐाꗼ鵅गाटासंꕰ腙-312 केआंभि#क�ागⷍᯓररूआबअलीⷍᯓु䁼⹥मौꕰ腙इ्ቖी#, स्聱滃ालिलहा ⷍᯓत्नीयाकूब, अब्बासⷍᯓु䁼⹥जहरू्ቤाह, रिरज聱滃ानु्ቤाहⷍᯓु䁼⹥सराꗼ鵅ु्ቤाहकाⷍᯓ्ሪामकान केरूⷍᯓम宮䧣अ聱滃ै풇कब्जाⷍᯓायागया❝ᒳसीमांकनकेउⷍᯓरान्ꗼ鵅्ቇ ामसमाजक뢙쇿�ूቷንमसे अ聱滃ै풇कब्जाहटानेहेꗼ鵅ुरूआबअलीⷍᯓु䁼⹥मोꕰ腙इ्ቖी# आቷንदकोቷንदनांक - 13.01.2023 कोनोቷንटसቷንनग�ꗼ鵅क뢙쇿गयीꗼ鵅थाअ聱滃गꗼ鵅करायागयाቷንकउᓰᒓकब्जे कोस्聱滃यंहटालेअन्यथाቷንनयमानुसारቷን聱滃धि풇ककाय�聱滃ाहीक뢙쇿जायेगी❝ᒳ

¶19

ቷንदनांक - 30.01.2023 को्ቌे 䁼⹥ीयले淲䨃ⷍᯓाल्ቛ ाराइसआ#यकारिरⷍᯓोट�ቷንकया गयाቷንकउᓰᒓकब्जेदारो्ቛ ाराअⷍᯓनाअ聱滃ै풇कब्जा्ቚ्቞ गꗼ鵅गाटेसेनहीहटायागया है❝ᒳꗼ鵅त ् मम宮䧣ले淲䨃ⷍᯓालक뢙쇿रिरⷍᯓोट�केआ풇ारⷍᯓरउꕰ腙्ቚꕰ腙राजस्聱滃संቷንहꗼ鵅ा-2006 क뢙쇿 풇ारा-67(1) केअन्ꗼ鵅ग�ꗼ鵅न्यायालयꗼ鵅हसीलदारडुमरिरयागंजम宮䧣聱滃ादसंꕰ腙टी202317630400488, टी202317630400489, टी202317630400487, टी202317630400486 योजिजꗼ鵅ቷንकयागयाहै ꗼ鵅थाⷍᯓ्ቌोकोनोቷንटसቷንनग�ꗼ鵅ቷንकयागयाहै❝ᒳउᓰᒓ聱滃ादोम宮䧣सुन聱滃ा䥑䂼हेꗼ鵅ुअቷን्ቇमቷንनयꗼ鵅 धिꗼ鵅भिथ-16.02.2023 है❝ᒳन्यायालय्ቛ ाराⷍᯓ्ቌोकोसुनकरगुण-दोⷭ⓻ केआ풇ारⷍᯓर ቷንनयमानुसारቷን聱滃धि풇ककाय�聱滃ाहीक뢙쇿जायेगी❝ᒳ

¶20

माꕰ腙न्यायालयकेआदे# ቷንदनांक-02.02.2023 केअनुⷍᯓालनम宮䧣्ቚ्቞ गꗼ鵅गाटेका स聱滃F/सीमांकनकरायागयाजिजसक뢙쇿रिरⷍᯓोट�ए聱滃ंनजरीनक्#ासंलኵⓜहै❝ᒳ"

¶21

In view of the fact that proceedings have been registered under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 (in short 'the Code-2006') in respect of Gata No.312 and that notices have been issued to the concerned parties and one of the dates fixed in the matter was 16.02.2023, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep this writ petition pending.

¶22

¶23

In view of the above, this Court finds that the impugned notice dated 13.01.2023 is not according to the provisions of the Code-2006 and also in view of the fact that proceedings under Section 67 of the Code-2006 have been initiated, the impugned notice dated 13.01.2023 is hereby quashed .

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the present writ petition is disposed off with the direction to the court concerned to decide the aforesaid cases (narrated in the instructions supplied today) under Section 67(1) of the Code-2006 strictly, in accordance with law, after following the mandate of Section 67 of the Code-2006 read with Rules 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules-2016 as elaborately dealt with by this Court in the case of Rishipal Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors. reported in 2023 (1) AWC 4. The parties concerned shall be provided full opportunity of hearing to make objections and hearing. The entire exercise shall be concluded within a period of six months from today.

¶25

Order Date :- 24.3.2023 Jyotsana

¶26

¶27

Digitally signed by :- JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ruab Ali and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruab Ali and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudha Vishwavindu and Another Vs State of U.P. and 15 Others

Dadhibal Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Baj Singh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bechu Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ganga Prasad Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Badami Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others