Dismissed

Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2023WRIC/7828/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of this writ petition regarding encroachment on village land. It directed the petitioner to institute proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code for the remaining encroached plot, within six months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to institute proceedings under Sections 25/26 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within six months; private respondents to be impleaded. Petition disposed of.

Shiv Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7828 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Shiv Bahadur Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- U.S. Verma,Satya Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Sri U.S. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents and Sri Azad Rai, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha.

¶6

The allegation in the present writ petition is that Gata Nos.468 and 465 have been recorded as Chakroad, whereas Gata No.469 is recorded as Nali and that the private respondents have encroached upon the same.

¶7

This Court passed the following order on 14.03.2023:-

¶8

"Heard U.S. Verma, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State authorities.

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that Gata No. 468 and 465 of village Kosafara, Tappa Daiya, Tehsil Koraon, District Prayagraj are entered in the revenue record as Chakroad and Gata No. 469 is recorded as Nali. It has been further submittted that the responden nos. 4, 5 and 6 have encroached upon on the land of aforesaid Gatas though the said land belongs to Gram Sabha. Petitioner has duly informed to the competent authority i.e. respondent no. 3 in respect of aforesaid encroachment made by the private respondents but till date no proceedings in respect of removal of encroachment have been initiated by the competent authority.

¶10

Matter requires consideration.

¶11

Learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent is directed to take instructions in the matter.

¶12

List this matter on 27.03.2023, as fresh.

¶13

Learned counsel for petitioner is also permitted to implead Gram Sabha, Tehsildar Koraon, District Prayagraj as opposite party in the writ petition. The said impleadment may be done during course of the day."

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel has placed instructions which are accompanied by spot inspection memo and also other material to demonstrate that encroachments have been removed and even the

¶15

crops standing on the spot were handed over in the custody of village Pradhan as Head of the Land Management Committee on 16.03.2023.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that in so far as the encroachment from Gata Nos.468 and 469 is concerned, the same has been removed, however encroachment is still there on the Gata No.465.

¶17

No useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition pending or call upon the private respondents to make their say in the matter.

¶18

In case the petitioner is aggrieved by non removal of encroachment from Gata No.465 which is recorded as Chakroad, it is open for the petitioner to institute proceedings under Sections 25/26 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶19

In case such proceedings are registered, the private respondents shall positively be arrayed as opposite parties in the proceedings and the matter shall be heard after considering their objections and after affording full opportunity of hearing to them in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of registration of such proceedings.

¶20

The petition stands disposed of .

¶21

Order Date :- 26.4.2023 AKShukla/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Hemant Kumar Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Tilak Dhari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Suchit Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ramdas Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sharwan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Lal Ji and 3 Others Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil - Handia and 8 Others