Disposed

Vijay Hind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2024/620/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL seeking removal of an alleged encroachment on public utility land recorded as Shrubs in revenue records. The State pointed to the petitioner's remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The petition was disposed of with liberty to file such an application before the competent authority.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to move application under Section 67 U.P. Revenue Code before respondent No. 3 within two weeks, to be considered and decided expeditiously.

Vijay Hind Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50231

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 620 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Vijay Hind Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 to 3 and Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.

¶7

In light of the proposed order, notices to private respondent is dispensed with.

¶8

Petitioner approached this court seeking a direction to State authorities to get remove the illegal encroachment/possession of the respondent No. 5 from the land gata No. 253/3.3380 which is recorded as other Shrubs in the revenue records.

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondent No. 5 along with other villagers are illegally encroaching upon the land of Gata No. 253/3.3380 situated at aforesaid village despite the fact that the same is public utility land and recorded as Shrubs in the revenue records. 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.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has submitted that petitioner has efficacious remedy under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 where after obtaining report of Revenue Inspector and issuing notices to the alleged encroachers, effective orders for removal of the alleged encroachments as well as levy of penalty can be passed in case the allegations are found correct.

¶11

Learned counsel for petitioner at this stage submits that petitioner may be given liberty to move an application under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the competent authority.

¶12

Accordingly, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition, is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an application before the respondent No. 3 and in case such an application is made within two weeks from today, respondent No. 3 is directed to proceed to consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶13

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 25.7.2024 Ravi/

¶15

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

Vijay Hind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Hind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 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

Dr. Shivangi Saxena Vs Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University Thru. Registrar and 2 Others

Sh. Rudra Pratap Singh and 2 Others Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Labor and Employment Govt. India and 3 Others

Pandit Ninua Ram Shiksha Samiti,Mathura Thru. Its Manager Ashok Kumar Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others

Miesha (Minor) Thru. Her Natural Guardian Shahjahan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

R.A.V. Public School,Ilfatganj,Tanda Ambedkar Nagar Thru. Vice Principal Sri Vikas Vs Central Board of Secondary Education Thru. Secy./Controller of Examination,New Delhi and Another

Bhavani Prasad Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko and 4 Others