Disposed

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru.Secy. of Revenue Deptt. Lko and 10 Others

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2024/709/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a PIL for removal of illegal encroachments on village land. Court advised efficacious remedy under Section 67 U.P. Revenue Code. Petitioner granted liberty to apply under that provision.

What did the court decide?

liberty to move application under Section 67 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; direction to authority to proceed expeditiously.

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru.Secy. of Revenue… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57955

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 709 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Singh

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru.Secy. Of Revenue Deptt. Lko And 10 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Bahadur Singh 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 Land Management Committee- respondent No.5 has been accepted by Sri Mohan Singh.

¶9

In light of the proposed order, notice to private respondents is dispensed with.

¶10

By means of instant public interest petition, the petitioner has approached this court seeking a direction to the Staterespondents for vacation of gram sabha land of gata No.531 Gha/ 0.7750 hectare recorded as " Banjar" as well as gata No.531 GA/0.3420 recorded as "Reserve of Forest" in the revenue records relating to Village Karampur Parwar Bhar (Meeranpur) Tehsil Sadar, Sultanpur from illegal encroachments, expeditiously.

¶11

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that bhu-mafiyas and other unscrupulous persons using muscle power, money power and political clout and with connivance with the officials have made illegal encroachments over the aforesaid public utility land due to which the villagers are facing big problem and in this connection the petitioner has made several representations to the authorities concerned but no action has been taken.

¶12

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

¶13

found correct.

¶14

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.

¶15

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 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.

¶16

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 27.8.2024 RKM./A. Verma

¶18

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

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru.Secy. of Revenue Deptt. Lko and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru.Secy. of Revenue Deptt. Lko and 10 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

Devesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

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

Mohd. Nafees and 5 Others Vs Addl. Commissioner (Judicial ) Faizabad and 3 Others

Shyambol vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Food and Civil Supplies, Lucknow and Others

Vimal Kumar vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Thru. Dy. General Manager(Now Superintending Engineer)Etdc, Lucknow vs M/S Prem Conductors Private Limited,Ahmedabad Thru. Its Director