Disposed

Raghuvir Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 43 Others

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2024WPIL/467/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a PIL seeking eviction of illegal encroachers on public land in Hardoi district. The respondent counsel cited Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to file an application under the cited section.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an application under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within two weeks.

Raghuvir Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48530

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 467 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Raghuvir Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 43 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhananjay Trivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jitendra Kumar Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Dhananjay Trivedi, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5.

¶8

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

¶9

By means of present writ petition the petitioner has approached this court seeking a direction to the State respondents to evict the private respondents as well as any other person who has illegally encroached upon the public land being Gata No. 30, area 0.6200 hectares, situated in Bhagwantpur Out Town Area, Nagar Panchayat - Pali, District - Hardoi, expeditiously.

¶10

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that illegal encorachment over the public land has been made by private respondents existing over Gata No. 30, area 0.6200 hectares, situated in Bhagwantpur Out Town Area, Nagar Panchayat - Pali, District - Hardoi, and said land is recorded as "public road" in the revenue records.

¶11

It is further submitted that with regard to aforesaid illegal encorachment over the public land by the private respondents, the petitioner has moved several applications before the authorities concerned, but till date no action has been taken in this regard.

¶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 found correct.

¶13

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.

¶14

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 within two weeks from today and in case such an application is made within the prescribed period, the said authority is directed to proceed to consider and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 15.7.2024 A. Verma

¶16

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶17

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

Raghuvir Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 43 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghuvir Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 43 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

Trinetra Dey and Another Vs Addl. Civil Judge Senior Division Court NO.21 Lko

The Commissioner Commercial Tax Lucknow Vs M/S Lancer Food Products Gautambudh Nagar

Maahey Laka Vs Sri Jamal Ahmad Khan and Another

Parmeshwar Singh Vs D.D.C. Sultanpur and Others

The Commissioner Commercial Taxes U.P.Lucknow Vs M/S K.R. Enterprises 96/14 Purana Ganeshganj Lucknow

Tauqeer Alam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and Others