Israji v. Addl. Commissioner Adminisration, Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya and Others

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2024WRIC/3832/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim order in a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a tree plantation Patta. The Court restrained respondents from cutting standing trees pending review of a report contradicting the finding that no trees were planted.

What did the court decide?

Restrained respondents from cutting any standing trees on the said land till the next date of listing.

Israji vs Addl. Commissioner Adminisration, Ayodhya… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3832 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Israji

¶4

Respondent :- Addl. Commissioner Adminisration, Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh,Ravindra Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Vijay Bahadur Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3, Shri Mangal Singh Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ravindra Shukla, learned counsel for respondent no. 4, Shri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 and perused the material available on record.

¶7

It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner was given a Patta for plantation of trees on 22.12.2007. Further submission is that subsequently allotment of said Patta the petitioner had planted trees but in the most illegal and arbitrary manner, the said allotment was cancelled by the orders of Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Sultanpur after he recorded the finding that the petitioner had violated the terms and conditions of the said Patta granted to him and he had not planted any trees on the said land. In this regard, a complaint was made by respondent no. 4, on which the proceedings were initiated and on the said proceedings, the report of Tehsildar Kandipur was also sought for.

¶8

The petitioner being aggrieved by the order of the learned Additional District Magistrate (Administration) Sultanpur preferred a revision before the learned Additional

¶9

Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya, who had also returned the finding that on the said land no trees were found and accordingly, the petitioner had violated the terms and condition of the Patta granted to him and upheld the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Sultanpur.

¶10

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that both the orders are illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the record. In support of his submission, he has produced a copy of the Khasra wherein there is an endorsement of dated 23.12.2022 indicating that on inspection of said land, trees of Mangoes, guavava and blackberry, 33 trees in total were found on the said land. He submits that the said report was not taken into consideration while passing the said order and the report clearly indicates that there are 36 trees standing on the said land, consequently, the impugned order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Sultanpur and order dated 28.03.2024 passed by Additional Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya are clearly arbitrary and even otherwise he submits that according to the Patta , the petitioner is the owner of the trees and not of the said land while on the other hand, after cancelling the Patta , the respondents are proceeded to cut the standing trees.

¶11

In light of the above, let a counter affidavit be filed by the respondent within three weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

¶12

List this case on 18.07.2024.

¶13

Till the next date of listing the respondents are restrained from cutting any standing trees on the said land.

¶14

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 27.4.2024 Virendra

¶16

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

Israji v. Addl. Commissioner Adminisration, Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israji v. Addl. Commissioner Adminisration, Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya and 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

Executive Engineer/Engineer Res Division,Pradhan Mantri Gramin Sadak Yojana,Red,Unnao vs Commercial Court- 1, Lucknow and 4 Others

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Legal Hub, Lko. Thru. Manager vs Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Additional District Judge(Court No. 5) Barabanki and Another

Executive Engineer/Engineer Res Division,Pradhan Mantri Gramin Sadak Yojana,Red,Unnao vs Commercial Court- 1, Lucknow and 4 Others

M/S Dayachand Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd. Muzaffarnagar Thru. Its Auth. Signatory vs Commercial Court No. 1, Lko. Thru. Presiding Officer and Another

Executive Engineer/Engineer Res Division,Pradhan Mantri Gramin Sadak Yojana,Red,Unnao vs Commercial Court- 1, Lucknow and 4 Others

Kedar Nath and Another vs Deputy Director Consolidation, Faizabad and Others