Dismissed

Aslam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2024/220/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL challenging private respondents' denial of playground access on government school land; Court dismissed petition, allowing petitioner freedom to approach authorities or file civil suit.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with liberty to approach authorities or file civil suit.

What the court decided

Aslam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:21716

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 220 of 2024 Petitioner :- Aslam Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Rishabh Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for respondent No.s 1 to 4 while notice on behalf of respondent No.5- Gaon Sabha has been accepted by Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey.

¶6

In light of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶7

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that a primary school and a junior high school are existing upon the land situated at gata No.276 area 0.367 hectare which is recorded as ' Khalihan' in the revenue records of Village Gauriya, Tehsil Mahmudabad, District Sitapur. It is stated that the school has been constructed on one part of the said land while remaining part is vacant which is used by the children as play ground. It is the grievance of the petitioner that private respondents do not permit the children to utilize the play ground despite the fact that the said land is ' Khalihan' and is a gaon sabha land.

¶8

Learned Standing counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that public interest petition in this regard would not be maintainable against private individuals and the grievance if any of the petitioner has to be raised before appropriate authority or by initiating appropriate proceedings in civil court seeking to restrain the private respondents from interfering in utilization of the said land as play ground.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that he may be given liberty to approach the competent authority in this regard failing which he may initiate appropriate proceedings before civil court.

¶10

In light of the above, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue his grievance before respondent No.s 1 to 4. In case, his grievance is not redressed he may initiate appropriate proceedings before civil court.

¶11

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶12

Order Date :- 13.3.2024/RKM.

¶13

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aslam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Aslam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kartikeya Verma @ Rahul Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Collector Lakhimpur Kheri and 2 Others

Hem Kant Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Social Welfare Lko. and 6 Others

Raj Nath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Public Works Deptt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and 4 Others

Ram Sajiwan Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Transport Lucknow and Ors.

State of U.P. Vs Smt. Indu Pratha Kumari

Ram Manohar Singh Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ayodhya and 5 Others