Manoj Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Manoj Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No direction issued; liberty granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application under the U.P. Revenue Code Manual for execution of the Prescribed Authority's order if the application for recall is rejected.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct the State authorities to ensure release of Gata No.1949/0.4180 hectares at village Baraon, Pargana Paschimrath, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya, recorded as pond, from the illegal possession of private respondents. +1 more

Court's answer

Where an application for recall/restoration of the order dated 30.12.2022 filed by respondent no.6 is pending consideration before the competent authority, no direction as sought by the petitioner can be issued at this stage till the proceedings are concluded by the Prescribed Authority.

Ratio / Principle

No further directions are required to be issued with regard to compliance of the order passed under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code.

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to move an appropriate application under the U.P. Revenue Code Manual for execution of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority, in case the application for recall of that order is rejected.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PIL disposed of by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Alok Mathur, J.) on 16.7.2024 (Neutral Citation 2024:AHC-LKO:48115). The petitioner sought a direction to State authorities to release Gata No.1949/0.4180 hectares at village Baraon, Pargana Paschimrath, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya, recorded as pond, from the illegal possession of private respondents. Proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code had concluded on 30.12.2022 with an order of eviction and imposition of penalty against the private respondent by the Prescribed Authority; however, respondent no.6's application for recall/restoration of that order is pending before the competent authority. Holding that no direction could be issued while the recall application remained pending, and that no further directions were required regarding compliance of the Section 67 order, the Court disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner liberty to move an execution application under the U.P. Revenue Code Manual if the recall application is rejected.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48115

Court No. - 7

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 518 of 2024 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar,Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

By means of this petition, the petitioner has approached to this Court seeking a direction to the State authorities to ensure the release of land in respect of Gata No.1949/0.4180 hectares, situated at village Baraon, Pargana Paschimrath, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya which is recorded as pond from the illegal possession of private respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code were initiated and the same were concluded on 30.12.2022 holding the private respondent to have encroached upon the gaon sabha land and order of eviction and imposition of penalty was passed by the Prescribed Authority.

Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions, informs the Court that the respondent no.6 has moved an application for recall/restoration of the order dated 30.12.2022, which is pending consideration before the competent authority.

Accordingly, in the aforesaid circumstances where an application for recall of the respondent no. 6 has been filed which is pending consideration, no direction as sought by the petitioner can be issued at this stage till the proceedings are concluded by the Prescribed Authority.

In light of above facts no further directions are required to be issued with regard to compliance of the order passed under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move appropriate application under U.P. Revenue Code Manual for execution of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority, in case application for recall of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority is rejected.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed of .

Order Date :- 16.7.2024/Renu

(Alok Mathur, J.)

Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench