Disposed

Mohd. Shameem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2024/6076/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A six-briefedly disposed public interest writ petition filed by a volleyball player challenging the construction of a water tank on land reserved for a playground. The court did not quash the order but directed the petitioner to approach the Board of Revenue.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to move an application/revision under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, before the Board of Revenue, Ayodhya Division.

Mohd. Shameem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48146-DB

¶2

Court No. - 3

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6076 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mohd. Shameem Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Bhanu Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of the State-respondents and Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of Gram Sabha.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that he is the resident of Village- Saray Mahesha, Pargana-Rokha, Tehsil-Tiloi, DistrictAmethi and not only him, but also, the other residents of the same village, are exercising their right to play in Gata No. 2156 Minjumla, which has been earmarked as 'Khel Ka Maidan', on an order being passed by the District Collector, however, the respondents are trying to construct a water tank in village-Pure Shiva under the scheme of Jal Jeevan Mission. No resolution was passed by the Gram Panchayat,but, the Village Pradhan on his own, advised the authorities to construct the water tank over the land area 0.256 hectare of Gata No. 2156, total admeasuring 0.4050 hectare.

¶8

The Area Lekhpal and the Revenue Inspector have earmarked the land reserved for the playground as per the order of the Sub.Divisional OfÏcer, Tiloi, district-Amethi dated 11-04-2018 and the respondents have started raising construction of water tank over it. Some villagers have objected to such playground being taken over for construction of the overhead water tank. In pursuance of such objections, the Area Lekhpal has also submitted a report on 10-09-2023. In the said report, there is a remark made that the entire land 2156 minjumla, admeasuring 0.4050 hectare has been recorded in Banjar Khata and belongs to the Gaon Sabha, but, the actual partition of the same, has not taken

¶9

place. Thereafter, an application was moved under section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 by Mohd. Nasir and Mohd. Shakir against the Gram Panchayat and 3 other private persons on which, the order has been passed by the Additional District Magistrate(Judicial),Tehsil-Tiloi, districtAmethi in Case No. 94 of 2024 on 25-06-2024, approving the draft report and draft map prepared by the revenue ofÏcials of the tehsil concerned. As a result of the order dated 25-06-2024, the playground, that was initially earmarked by an order passed by the Sub.Divisioinal Magistrate in the year 2018, has been divided into two parts and one part is being utilized for construction of water tank. The petitioner was not a party in such application moved under section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and he had no knowledge that such proceedings were taken place. Now, the petitioner has come to know only after the construction is being raised in pursuance of the order dated 25-06-2024. The petitioner is a state level Volleyball player.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has pointed out that even if the petitioner is not a party to the original proceedings initiated under section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, he still has a remedy under section 210 of the U.P.Revenue Code, 2006, by filing a revision before the Board of Revenue/Commissioner of the Division concerned, under sub. section 2 thereof.

¶11

This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to move an appropriate application/revision before the Board of Revenue or Divisional Commissioner, Ayodhya Mandal,Ayodhya, who shall look into the grievance of the petitioner by summoning the papers relating to the demarcation being done despite there being a specific order passed by the Sub.Divisional Magistrate, in the year 2018, reserving the land as playground.

¶12

Order Date :- 16.7.2024 AKS

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Shameem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Shameem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko. and 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

Ramkali and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Secrt. Lko. and 5 Others

Smt. Kulha Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 2 Others

Mahendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Collector / Distrct Magistrate , Sitapur and Others

Jabir Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and Others

Reeta Upadhyay Vs District Magistrate , Ayodhya and Others

Amarnath Polutary Farm , Barabanki Thru. Proprietor Shri Amarnath Gautam and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Finance Secy. Ministry of Finance , New Delhi and Others