Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking direction to police not to interfere with his peaceful possession on private land and to take action against an officer accused of house demolition. The Court held the dispute is private in nature and directed suit or criminal remedy instead.
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. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38605 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Karan Yadav,Poonam Yadav,Yadvendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vidit Narayan Mishra,Vijay Kumar
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Petitioner is before this Court seeking following reliefs:
" i) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing to S.D.M. Phoolpur and Inspector as well as Local Police, Police Station- Jhunsi not to interfere in peaceful possession as well as Rasta (Road) of Petitioner situated on his own Bhumidhari land Plot No. 337 situated in village-Katka, Post-Jhunsi, TehsilPhoolpur, District-Prayagraj.
ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing to Respondents to take necessary action against his own I.P.S. Officer Sabha Raj Yadav for demolition of house of petitioner on 06.05.2022 with the help of S.D.M. Phoolpur and S.O. Police Station-Jhunsi."
The dispute inter-se petitioner and respondent no. 6 is a purely private dispute and, in case, a private incumbent is interfering in peaceful possession of petitioner, then remedy of petitioner lies to file civil suit before the court concerned and make prayer for grant of injunction, that would be tested on the parameters of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss, in view of this, payer made by the petitioner certainly cannot be accorded by us. We also make it clear that in case an incumbent is trying to take law into his own hand, then the common law remedy is invoked by the petitioner as is provided for under Code of Criminal Procedure, but as far as this Court is concerned, this Court cannot accord any relief to petitioner, as has been prayed by her.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 4.4.2023 A. Mandhani
Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court can issue a writ of Mandamus to restrain police interference in a peaceful possession dispute on private land.
Whether this Court can direct respondents to take action against an officer for demolition of a house.
Ashok Kumar Yadav
State Of U.P.
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Manjive Shukla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
