Disposed

Kamlesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 24 Others

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2024WPIL/169/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad disposed of a PIL seeking eviction of encroachers on public utility land. The bench directed that since Section 67 proceedings and subsequent revisions are pending, no immediate eviction order can be passed, but revisional authorities must conclude proceedings expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Revisional authorities directed to conclude proceedings expeditiously; liberty granted to file execution application if revisions rejected.

Kamlesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:17774

¶2

Court No. - 6

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 169 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Kamlesh

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 24 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Nishad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey

¶7

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶8

Heard Shri Anil Kumar Nishad, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶9

In light of the proposed order, notices to private respondents are dispensed with.

¶10

The petitioner approached this Court seeking a direction to private respondents to remove the encroachment over the Gata No. 503, 482, 693, 1373 and 469 situated at Village Kursat Khurd, Tehsil Bilgram, District Hardoi, which are recorded as Talab (Pond).

¶11

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that the private respondents have encroached upon Gata No.503, 482, 693, 1373 and 469 situated at Village Kursat Khurd, Tehsil Bilgram, District Hardoi, which is recorded Khad Gaddha, Khalihan and Rasta and is a public utility land. It has submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that several complaints were made by the villagers for removal of the illegal possession and proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code initiated against the encroachers are pending.

¶12

It is in the aforesaid circumstances, a prayer has been made for a directions to the respondents to conclude the said

¶13

proceedings and remove the illegal encroachment.

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel for the State on the basis of instructions has informed this Court that the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code were initiated and Case No. T2015103303214 (Gram Sabha Kursath Khurd Vs. Sone Lal and others) and Case No. T2015103303215 (Gram Sabha Kursath Khurd Vs. Ram Sewak). He submits that the proceedings were concluded on 06.04.2018 where the private respondents were declared to be encroachers and ordered for eviction and penalty were imposed. It has been submitted that against the order of Prescribed Authority dated 06.04.2018, revisions have been filed, which are pending before the revisional authorities.

¶15

Considering the fact that the proceedings as prescribed under the U.P. Revenue Code are still pending, the direction as sought by the petitioner for demolition and eviction cannot be passed in the said pending proceedings.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, the revisional authorities are directed to conclude the revisional proceedings expeditiously and in case revisions are rejected and there is not other legal impediment, liberty is given to the petitioner to move appropriate application for execution of the order of the Prescribed Authority passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, this petition is disposed of.

¶18

¶19

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 27.2.2024 Virendra

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kamlesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 24 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 24 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

Maulana Abdul Rab Vs Civil Judge Senior Division Lucknow

Rajendra Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P Thru Prin Secy Food and Civil Supply Lko and Ors.

Ram Kumar and Anr. Vs A.D.O. Panchayat Faizabad and 3 Ors.

M/S Krishangini Enterprises, Lucknow Thru. Proprietors, Sri. Udai Agarwal Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Lucknow and Others

Sumit Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko and 8 Others

Kamlesh Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 6 Others