In this judgment, the Court dismissed a writ petition filed by M.P. Pathak and others against the State of U.P. and others. The bench held that the core facts regarding the construction site of a water tank and the specific grievance were not clear from the petition, leading to a dismissal without interference.
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. - 49
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37111 of 2022
Petitioner :- M.P. Pathak And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Hari Narayan Singh
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
Whether the water tank is constructed over plot no. 55 or it is constructed over plot no. 521, how the petitioner is affected is not clear from the writ petition.
Learned Standing Counsel states that wherever the water tank is constructed the petitioner can always get the water supply through pipelines.
Under such circumstances, no interference is warranted.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.1.2023 PK
(Siddhartha Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
M.P. Pathak And 7 Others
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Siddhartha Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
