Ram Pratap Ojha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC26 Sept 2024WRIC/8468/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking directions to prevent construction of Chak marg, removal of a gate restricting public access, and removal of illegally dumped bricks on his land, alleging forced encroachment by powerful private parties assisted by officials. The court directed an enquiry by the designated officer and listed the matter for further proceedings. No disposal was recorded i

What the court decided

AI extract

Ram Pratap Ojha vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8468 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ram Pratap Ojha Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Durga Prasad,Pradeep Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

¶2

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Shri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.6.

¶4

This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers :-

¶5

"(i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the opposite parties Nos.2 to 4 to ensure that no construction of Kharnja may be made over the Chak of the petitioner Gata No.1593/1 and 1593/2, situated in Village Sarme, Pargana Gaura Jamo, Tehsil Gauriganj, District Amethi, during pendency of the proceeding under Section 24 of the U.P.. Revenue Code, 2006 in the of opposite party No.3, contained in Annexure No.4 to the writ petition ;

¶6

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the opposite party No.2 to 4 to get removed/ or open permanently, the iron gate fixed by opposite party No.7, prohibiting the public which will be evident from photograph (Annexure No.1) ;

¶7

(iii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the opposite party No.2 to 4 to get removed the bricks illegally dumped by the opposite parties Nos 7 and 8 with the help of Naib Tehsildar (opposite party No.5) and police force 022.9.2024 (Sunday), in the Chak of the petitioner."

¶8

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the permanent resident of village Pure Alpi Tiwari, Post Sarme, Pargana Gaura Jamo, Tehsil Gauriganj, District Amethi and recorded tenure holder of Gata No.1593/1 area 0.686 hectare and Gata No.1593/2 area 0.037 hectare situated in village Sarme. Gata No.1594 is a Chak Marg. Copy of the revenue map of the village has been filed as Annexures 2 and 3 to the writ petition.

¶9

The respondent nos.7 and 8 are very powerful persons as the respondent No.7 is a retired Revenue Inspector and has remained posted in Tehsil Gauriganj almost entire service tenure as he is a permanent resident of Tehsil Musafirkhana. He has taken over the chak marg on Gata No.1594 and included in the Gata No.1595 which is in the name of his wife and his sons including respondent no.8. Now he has ensured the making of chak marg on the petitioner's Chak No.1593, out of 27 lattha width, Gata

¶10

No.1593 has only 11 latthas left.

¶11

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent nos.7 and 8 filed an application under Section 24 of The U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 on 28.6.2021 but on 04.08.2021, the respondent nos.7 and 8 have forcibly filled up soil on Gata No.1593 and the petitioner having no remedy had dialed police help line no.112. On the intervention of the police personnel, the filling of soil on Gata of the petitioner has been stopped. Again on 24.06.2023, such an endeavour was made by respondent nos.7 and 8 and the police was again called on helpline no.112. The attempt of the respondent nos.7 and 8 was stopped. However, again in the night of 05.09.2024, respondent nos.7 and 8 have started laying bricks on the petitioner's Gata No.1593. The petitioner approached respondent no.3 on the next date and the respondent no.3 directed the Tehsildar/Station House Officer to look into the grievance of the petitioner.

¶12

In the night of 21.09.2024, the sister-in-law of the petitioner had expired and on 22.09.2024, the entire family was busy for cremation/last rites. On 23.09.2024, the respondent nos.7 and 8 without any authority managed the Naib Tehsildar-respondent no.5 and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gauriganj, sent police force with four tractors of bricks and forcibly dumped the same on the Gata No.1593 of the petitioner.

¶13

The petitioner tried to stop the respondents from laying bricks on the petitioner's land of Gata No.1593 by saying that his application under Section 24 is still pending. However, no heed was paid. The true copies of the photographs taken during such encroachment on petitioner's land destroying his standing crops have been filed as Annexure 1 to the writ petition.

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents shall seek instructions from respondent no.3 and respondent no.5. The respondent no. 3 shall conduct an enquiry and file a counter affidavit sworn personally by him with regard to the findings in his search enquiry.

¶15

List this matter after three weeks i.e., on 24.10.2024.

¶16

Order Date :- 26.9.2024 Pks

¶17

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Pratap Ojha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ram Pratap Ojha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S M R Enterprises, Thru. Proprietor Nausheen Ara Zakir Khan vs Union of India Thru. Secy., Ministry of Railways, New Delhi and Others

Nileshwar Pratap vs Punjab National Bank Thru. Branch Manager, Nanpara Bahraich and 4 Others

Baboolal and 18 Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation District Amethi and 2 Others

Rajiv Tandan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Dist. Magistrate Lko 2 Others

U.P. Purva Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. Thru. Asst. General Manager (Operations) Agra vs Union of India Ministry Communication Deptt. of Post Thru. Secy. and 4 Others

Ashish Sahu vs Punjab National Bank Thru. Its Branch Manager and 4 Others