Dismissed

Ram Pal Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC6 Oct 2023WRIC/5196/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition seeking mandamus for compliance of orders regarding removal of illegal encroachment was dismissed. The court held that the petitioner, despite being a vigilant resident, had no locus standi after informing authorities, ending his duty.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition seeking mandamus for compliance of orders against illegal encroachment was dismissed.

Ram Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193316

¶2

Court No. - 52

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5196 of 2021

¶4

Petitioner :- Ram Pal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Dubey,Brij Raj Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing counsel for State respondents.

¶7

Present petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:

¶8

"(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondents for compliance of orders dated 08.08.2019 & 27.08.2019 passed by Assistant Collector 1st class/Tahsildar Auraiya in case no. 00311/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100311 (Gaon Sabha vs. Pitam Singh), case no. 00312/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100312 (Gaon Sabha vs. Jagdish Singh), case no. 00315/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100315 (Gaon Sabha vs. Satyapal), case no. 00316/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100316 (Gaon Sabha vs. Shishupal), case no. 00317/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100317 (Gaon Sabha vs. Sultan Singh), case no. 00318/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100318 (Gaon Sabha vs. Kailash), case no. 00320/2019 Computerised case no. T201903050100320 (Gaon Sabha vs. Hotilal), case no. 00321/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100321 (Gaon Sabha vs. Mahesh Singh) & in case no. 00314/2019 computerised case no. T201903050100314 (Gaon Sabha vs. Atar Singh) respectively, under Section 67 of Uttar Pradesh Code, 2006, forthwith or as expeditiously as possible."

¶9

Learned Standing counsel for State respondents highlighted para 3 of the counter affidavit preferred on behalf of respondent no. 2 to 4 through which he submitted that in compliance of orders dated 08.08.2019 and 27.08.2019 passed by Tehsildar, Auraiya, the illegal encroachment from most of the portion of plot nos. 391/0.1010 hectare and 392/0.3050 hectare situated in village Kamlapur, Mauja Tararai, Tehsil and District Auraiya have been removed on 15.10.2021 by the revenue team with help of police force and in presence of villagers and encroachers. The encroachers are belonging to Banjara community, who are very poor persons, they have neither agricultural nor residential land and looking their poor financial conditions, recovery is not possible from them. It is relevant to state that against the orders

¶10

passed by Tehsildar, Auraiya, dated 8.8.2019 and 27.8.2019, case no. 29/2020 has been filed by the encroachers before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Auraiya, which is pending. It is also relevant to state here that residential construction which is standing over some portion of the land, is the only place of their resident and in this respect, they have given statement in writing that after making some alternative arrangement, they will remove the remaining construction.

¶11

Learned Standing counsel also submitted that petitioner is only complainant and as such he has no locus to seek the prayer made through the instant petition and raised objection regarding maintainability of the petition.

¶12

Learned counsel for petitioner could not give a satisfactory reply to the objection raised by learned Standing counsel.

¶13

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances it is crystal clear that duty of petitioner being a vigilant resident of village has come to an end only after informing the respondent authorities about the encroachment and he has no locus to seek the prayer made through the instant petition and as such the instant petition stands dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 6.10.2023 Shaswat

¶15

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

Ram Pal Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Pal Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phool Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Bhagwan Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Umesh Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Shivbardani Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Pyare Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Santosh Kumar Keshari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others