Balwant Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2024/696/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), PIL No. 696 of 2024, Balwant Yadav v. State of U.P.; encroachment on public utility land, Gata 671/676 (Chakmarg), Gata 672 (nali), Village Nasratpur, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya; Sections 26/67 U.P. Revenue Code 2006; writ disposed of without merits with liberty to apply to competent authority; expeditious decision directed; Neutral Citation 2024:AHC-LKO:57558; Order Date 23.8.2024; Judge Alok Mathur.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to move an application under Sections 26/67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the competent authority; the authority is directed to consider and decide such application expeditiously in accordance with law. ¶¶13

Balwant Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57558

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 696 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Balwant Yadav

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And 3 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Niwas Pathak,Komal Chaurasia Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

¶7

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for State -respondents while notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha- respondent No.4 has been accepted by Sri Mohan Singh.

¶9

Petitioner has approached this court seeking a direction to opposite parties No.2 and 3 for removal of illegal encroachment made over the public utility land of Gata No.671 and 676 which are recorded as Chakmarg and gata no.672 recorded as nali in the revenue records of Village Nasratpur, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya, expeditiously.

¶10

1. It is further submitted that adjacent chak owners of the said gatas have illegally encroached over the aforesaid entire land against which petitioner has made several representations/ requests to the authorities concerned but no action has been taken.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that petitioner has efficacious remedy under Sections 26/67 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.

¶12

Learned counsel for petitioner at this stage submits that petitioner may be given liberty to move an application under Sections 26/67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the competent authority.

¶13

Accordingly, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition, is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move

¶14

an application before the competent authority and in case such an application is made the said authority is directed to proceed to consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶15

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 23.8.2024 RKM./A. Verma

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Balwant Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Virendra Vikram Singh Vs Vimal Kumar Singh and Others

M/S Sardar Motors Civil Lines Faizabad Thru Its Partner Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax U.P.Commercial Tax Bhawan Lko

Sunil Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Food. and Civil Supply Lko and 4 Others

Tufail Ahmad Vs State of. U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Shiv Mangal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and 5 Others