Dismissed

Kumari Priya Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 8 Others

Allahabad HC16 May 2024WPIL/425/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a PIL challenging a Gram Sabha resolution to construct an Overhead Water Tank on land in Village Seri. It held that proximity to a temple in a different village and technical decisions regarding railway vibrations do not render the decision illegal or arbitrary, warranting no writ interference.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed, and the resolution for construction of the Overhead Water Tank was upheld.

Kumari Priya Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40305

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 425 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Kumari Priya Dwivedi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 8 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjai Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Rishabh Kapoor

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Sanjai Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for respondent no. 7 (Gram Sabha Seri) as well as respondent no. 8 (Gram Sabha Karanpur).

¶8

By means of the instant writ petition filed in public interest, the petitioner has challenged the validity of a resolution dated 29.01.2024 passed by the Gram Sabha Seri Block, Harchandpur, Pargana and Tehsil Sadar, District Raebareli, whereby the Gram Panchayat has resolved for construction of a Overhead Water Tank on land bearing Gata No. 560 measuring 0.380 Hectare.

¶9

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that earlier the Gram Sabha had resolved for construction of the Overhead Water Tank on land bearing Gata No. 592 which decision has arbitrarily altered. The construction of Overhead Water Tank on the proposed cite will adversely affect the temple that exists on adjacent to Gata No. 560.

¶10

On the basis of written instructions, provided by the SDM, Sadar, Raebareli, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel as well as the learned counsel for the Gram Sabha have submitted that although earlier the construction of Overhead Water Tank was proposed on land bearing Gata No. 592, this decision was changed as the Gata bearing No. 592 is adjacent to a railway line and the land was not found to be suitable for construction of an Overhead Water Tank, keeping in view the vibrations occurred due to passing of the trains on railway track. The copy of instructions is taken on record.

¶11

So far as the submission of the petitioner that the land on which construction of Water Head Tank is proposed, is adjacent to the temple, it is stated that the temple is situated in village Karanpur whereas the Overhead Water Tank is being constructed in village Seri. There is a distance of 5 meters

¶12

between the steps of the temple and the proposed Overhead Water Tank.

¶13

While deciding the writ petition filed in public interest, this Court has to keep in mind that construction of an Overhead Water Tank is a work being done in public interest and stalling that work will not be in public interest. This Court lacks necessary technical expertise to doubt the decision taken by the authorities for not constructing an Overhead Water Tank on a Plot or land which is adjacent to a railway line. The decision taken to construct an Overhead Water Tank on Plot No. 560 does not suffer from any illegality or arbitrariness merely because a temple is situated nearby, in another village, cannot be a ground for this Court to exercise its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the decision, when the decision does not suffer from any illegality or arbitrariness.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid discussion, there appears no good ground to interfere in this writ petition. The writ petition lacks merit and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶15

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 27.5.2024 kkv/

¶17

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

Kumari Priya Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Priya Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 8 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

Shiv Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Maa Durga Aajeevika Shg, Gonda Thru. Secy., Smt. Aarti and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy., Food and Civil Supplies Deptt. Lucknow and Others

Zaibun Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Panchayati Raj, Lucknow and Others

Munna S/O Lala Vs State of U.P. Thru Deputy Labour Commissioner Faizabad Regi

Ram Kishore and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Revenue and 5 Ors.

Brij Nath Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others