Held there are disputed factual issues regarding land encroachment. Liberty granted to petitioner to approach revenue authorities or file injunction suit before disposal.
Liberty granted to petitioner to approach concerned authorities under revenue code or file an injunction suit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40122
Court No. - 17
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 458 of 2024
Petitioner :- Dhurv Uppadhyay Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 10 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Pandey,Prem Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner, State Counsel for opposite parties 1 to 4 and Mr. Govind Chaurasiya Advocatee Holding brief on behalf of Mr. Mohan Singh learned counsel for opposite party No.5. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite parties 6 to 11 dispensed with.
Petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authority for removal of alleged illegal encroachment over gata No. 663 having an area of 4.9960 of Hectares out of which allegedly encroachment has been made over 0.076 Hectares in village Ramapur, Tehsili Sadar, district Ayodhya.
Learned State Counsel has been provided written instructions dated 25th May, 2024, which are taken on record and as per which out of the total area of the aforesaid gata No.663, an area of 0.0840 Hectares has been recorded as bhumidhari and 4.9120 has been indicated as abadi.
The instructions also indicate that there is no reserved land for gaon sabha in the aforesaid gata and about 90 houses stand constructed over aforesaid gata since a very long time. Petitioner's house is also said to have been constructed on the same gata along with that of opposite parties 6 to 11.
However learned counsel for petitioner has disputed the aforesaid report with the submission that the instructions have apparently been submitted with regard to some other gata. It has also been submitted that petitioner has time and again made complaints with regard to illegal encroachments which have been stopped by the concerned authorities themselves.
In view of submissions, it appears that there are disputed questions of fact involved in the present writ petition due to which liberty is granted to petitioner to approach the authorities concerned under the revenue code or for filing an injunction suit.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 27.5.2024 prabhat
Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether existence of disputed questions of fact on encroachment status warranted disposal of writ petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dhurv Uppadhyay
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko.
10 Others
Manish Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
