Disposed

Badelal and 22 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024WRIC/29463/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by 23 alleged owners regarding encroachment and damage to land and trees was dismissed. The court held that the matter needs determination in the statutory forum and granted liberty to the petitioners to initiate appropriate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; liberty granted to petitioners to take appropriate statutory proceedings.

Badelal and 22 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:150338

¶2

Court No. - 52

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29463 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Badelal And 22 Others Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravi Shankar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Azad Rai,C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ravi Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the writ petitioners who are 23 in number and Sri Dinesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel who appears for respondents No. 1 to 3. Notice on behalf of fourth respondent has been accepted by Sri Azad Rai.

¶7

The writ petitioners herein claims to be the recorded owners of plot No. 147Ka and 182Kha and the plot No. 147M 0.6730 hectares is recorded as ushar and is the property of the Gaon Sabha. The writ petitioner claims to have planted trees on plot No. 147 Ka and 182M and by virtue of passage of time and provision of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 they claim to be the owners of the trees also and as stated in para 10 certain trees fell down and now the respondents are encroaching and taking possession of the land and interfering with their possession.

¶8

Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the respondents not to damage the well and not to cut the trees.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel submits that the issue which the writ petitioners seeks to raise needs determination under the statutory forum/proceedings as permissible and advisable under law and for that purpose the writ petition would not be maintainable.

¶10

Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them, the writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the writ petitioners to take appropriate proceedings as permissible and warranted under law and this Court has no reasons to disbelieve that in case proceedings are initiated the same shall be maintainable with due expedition.

¶11

Order Date :- 13.9.2024 Rajesh

¶12

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Badelal and 22 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badelal and 22 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vinod and 4 Others vs State of Up and 13 Others

Nazibunnisha and 2 Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Jiya Ram Verma vs Dr. Om Prakash Gupta, Deputy Director of Education, Ayodhya and Another

Prahalad Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy./ Prin. Secy., Deptt. Agriculture Edu. and Research, Lko. and 7 Others

Achchhe Lal and Another vs Deputy Director of Consolidation District Azamgarh and 9 Others

Badelal and 22 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others