Disposed

Ranjit Kumar Mauriya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2024WPIL/144/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A PIL sought removal of encroachments on public land (Chakmarg, Khalihan, Rasta) in Village Udaiyadeeh, District Pratapgarh. The State reported encroachment on Gata No. 382 with Section 67 U.P. Revenue Code proceedings initiated, and the other gatas vacant. Recording this statement, the court disposed of the petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ranjit Kumar Mauriya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:22345

¶2

Court No. - 5

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 144 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ranjit Kumar Mauriya Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 6 Others

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ambika Prasad Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta

¶5

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶6

Heard Ms Sarba Shukla, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Ambika Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ashish Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 4. Notice on behalf of respondent no. 7 has been accepted by Shri Pankaj Gupta.

¶7

No notice be issued to respondents no. 5 and 6 taking into consideration the nature of order proposed to be passed.

¶8

The instant petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to remove the illegal encroachments over the land bearing Gata No. 382, Gata No. 392 and Gata No. 393 situated in Village Udaiyadeeh,Pargana and Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh recorded in the revenue record as Chakmarg, Khalihan and Rasta respectively.

¶9

The Court had required learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions as the earlier instructions were incomplete.

¶10

Today Shri Ashish Singh, learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions sent by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patti, District Pratapgarh dated 13.03.2024 states that encroachment over the land bearing Gata No. 382 has been found and proceedings under the provisions of Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 have been initiated against the encroachers. He states that land bearing gata numbers 392 and 393 are vacant and no encroachments have been found.

¶11

He further states that endeavor would be made to finalise the said proceedings in accordance with law within the time period fixed in Code 2006 and rules governing the same.

¶12

The aforesaid statement is recorded.

¶13

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 14.3.2024 J.K. Dinkar

¶15

Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ranjit Kumar Mauriya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ranjit Kumar Mauriya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nikhil Hospital Sultanpur Road, District Amethi Thru. Its Owner /Smt. Rani Singh and Another Vs Appropriate Authority/State Appellate Authority Thru.Chairman Director Family Welfare,Lko. and Ors.

Abdul Rauf Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Rural Devlopment Civil Secrt. Lko. and 2 Others

Virendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

State of U.P. through Principal Secy. Tax Lucknow Vs Chief Controlling Revenue Authority U.P.Allahabad

Satya Prakash Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 6 Others

Dr. Kashika Srivastava Vs Dr. Abhishek Saxena