Rajnath Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

Rajnath Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/District Magistrate/Collector-Bhadohi, Sant Ravidas Nagar to decide Appeal No. D202316670000961 in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months of production of a certified copy of the order, after hearing the parties and without granting unnecessary adjournments.

Issue for consideration

Whether a mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to remove the alleged unauthorized construction made over Araji No.38, area 0.2530 hectare. +2 more

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the Court disposed of the writ petition finally, directing instead expeditious decision of the pending statutory appeal rather than ordering removal of the construction.

Ratio / Principle

The Court recorded as undisputed that an order for ejectment and damages was passed by the Tehsildar in the year 2020, and that the appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 filed by the private respondents is pending for disposal before respondent No.2/District Magistrate.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.2/District Magistrate/Collector-Bhadohi, Sant Ravidas Nagar was directed to consider and decide Appeal No. D202316670000961 (Shobh Nath Vs. Gaon Sabha Kuraiya) in accordance with law.ratio¶¶15
The appeal was to be decided expeditiously, preferably within three months from production of a certified copy of the order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.ratio¶¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Chandra Kumar Rai, J.) — WRIT - C No. 6731 of 2023, order date 3.10.2023. Writ petition seeking mandamus for removal of alleged unauthorized construction over Araji No.38 (area 0.2530 hectare) and disposal of the petitioner's representation dated 18.11.2022. An order of ejectment and damages had been passed by the Tehsildar in 2020 (order dated 19.10.2020); the private respondents' Appeal No. D202316670000961 (Shobh Nath Vs. Gaon Sabha Kuraiya) under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was pending before respondent No.2/District Magistrate/Collector, Bhadohi (Sant Ravidas Nagar). The Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, disposed of the petition with a direction to the District Magistrate/Collector to decide the appeal in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months of production of a certified copy of the order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:188726

Court No. - 51

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6731 of 2023

Petitioner :- Rajnath Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Prakash Srivastava,Bipin Lal Srivastava

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

1.Heard Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

2.The instant writ petition has been filed praying for a mandamus directing respondents to remove the unauthorized construction made by the respondent over Araji No.38, area 0.2530 hectare as well as for disposal of representation dated 18.11.2022 filed by the petitioner.

This court vide order dated 30.05.2023 directed the District Magistrate/Collector, District-Bhadohi, Sant Ravidas Nagar to file personal affidavit.

In compliance of the order dated 30.05.2023 personal affidavit has been filed by District Magistrate/ Collector, District-Bhadohi, Sant Ravidas Nagar stating that appeal No. D202316670000961 under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been filed against the order of Tehsildar dated 19.10.2020, which is pending for disposal before respondent No.2.

Copy of the grounds of appeal filed under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been annexed as Annexure No.1 to the personal affidavit.

Counsel for the petitioner has filed counter affidavit to the personal affidavit filed on behalf of the District Magistrate/Collector, District-Bhadohi stating that order for ejectment and damages has been passed in the year 2020 but the appeal has been filed in the year 2023 after filing of the instant petition in order to linger on the proceeding. He further submitted that there is no interim order against the order of Tehsildar for ejectment and damages, as such encroachment is to be removed forthwith.

I have considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and perused the record.

There is no dispute about the fact that order for ejectment and damages have been passed by the Tehisildar in the year 2020. There is also no dispute about that appeal under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 filed by the private respondents before respondent No.2/District Magistrate is pending for disposal.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No.2/District Magistrate/Collector-Bhadohi, Sant Ravidas Nagar to consider and decide the aforementioned Appeal No.D202316670000961 (Shobh Nath Vs. Gaon Sabha Kuraiya) in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

Order Date :- 3.10.2023/PS*

Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad