Disposed

Shyam Sundar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2024/267/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL seeking removal of encroachment on land recorded as Jungle Dhak in Ambedkar Nagar. The State stated that proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were already initiated against the encroachers. The court disposed of the petition directing expeditious hearing and orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to expedite hearing and pass orders in pending Section 67 Revenue Code proceedings.

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:25607

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 267 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Shyam Sundar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Vinod Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 to 4 and Sri Manoj Kumar Nishad, Advocate has filed Vakalatnam on behalf of respondent No. 6 which is taken on record.

¶7

Petitioner approached this court seeking a direction to State authorities to remove the illegal encroachment of the respondent No. 6 from the land Gata No. 1079/0.283 Hectare which is recorded as Jungle Dhak situated at Village - Bhiti, Pargana - Mijhauda, Tehsil - Bhiti, District - Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondent No. 6 is illegally encroaching upon the land of Gata No. 1079/0.283 hectare situated at aforesaid village despite the fact that the same is public utility land and recorded as Jungle Dhak. It has also been stated that several representations have been made by the petitioner in this regard to the competent authority but no action has been taken by them consequently present writ petition has been filed.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions has submitted that proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 have already been initiated against the illegal encroachers and Case No. T20240404040500702 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Bale), Case No. T20240404040500703 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Hariram), Case No. T20240404040500701 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Ashok Kumar), Case No. T20240404040500699 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Sunil) and Case No. T20240404040500700 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Ram Sunam) have already been registered and notices have been issued to the alleged encroachers and only after orders are passed, necessary action will be taken against the encroachers.

¶10

In light of the above, considering the fact that proceedings in accordance with law i.e. U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 have already been initiated against the alleged encroachers, no further directions are required by this Court in exercise of powers

¶11

under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India.

¶12

However, the competent authority is directed to expedite the hearing in the aforesaid cases and pass necessary orders expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶13

With the above observations / directions, the writ petition stands disposed of .

¶14

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 22.3.2024 Ravi/

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shyam Sundar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Sundar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Prashant Kumar Yadav @ Veeru Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Arun Kumar Dubey @ Arun Kumar Vs U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited Lko. Thru. Branch Manager Distt. Faizabad

Vikash Singh and 19 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Shakuntla Singh vs Civil Judge Senior Division Kadipur Sultanpur and 2 Others

Santosh Singh and Ors. Vs Commissioner Lucknow Division Lucknow and Ors.

Khalid Mahmood Khan Vs State of U.P. and Others