Disposed

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Rev. Govt. U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2025WRIC/3000/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeking relief against obstruction of housing construction on granted land. Court directed initiation of revenue proceedings but did not adjudicate rival claims due to lack of notice to adjacent tenure holders.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to initiate proceedings under Section 65 or Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:135-DB

¶2

Court No. - 2

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3000 of 2022

¶4

Petitioner :- Arun Kumar

¶5

Respondent :- State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Rev. Govt. U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Durga Prasad,Rajesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶7

Hon'ble Rajan Roy, J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for State-opposite parties no.1 to 5.

¶9

Considering the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to opposite parties no.6 to 8 is dispensed with.

¶10

The petitioner claims to having a housing patta for constitution of a house on Gata No.99 which is recorded as navin parti. He clams to have constructed a house, however, the tenure holder of the adjacent land claims that the construction is on his holding and has, therefore, shut the door of the house by use of bricks. Being aggrieved, the petitioner initiated proceedings for demarcation on the administrative side and the report of the said exercise is Annexure-2, according to which the door of the petitioner and his construction was on the land granted to the petitioner for housing purposes and there was no encroachment on the land of the private opposite parties herein, who appear to be the tenure holders of Gata Nos.100, 101, 162 and 163. Based on the said exercise as claimed by the petitioner, the brick wall constructed by the private opposite parties on the door of the petitioner was removed. However, thereafter they have again blocked the egress and ingress of the petitioner.

¶11

Considering the facts of the case, let the petitioner initiate

¶12

appropriate proceedings under Section 65 or Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 or both as the case may be, whereupon the court concerned would be obliged to do needful, but after ascertaining the facts. We make it clear that we have not adjudicated the claim of the private opposite parties as they have not been put to notice.

¶13

Writ petition is disposed of with liberty aforesaid.

¶14

(Brij Raj Singh, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 2.1.2025 Rao/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Rev. Govt. U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Rev. Govt. U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 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

Similar cases

Nalanda Engicon Private Ltd. Patna Thru. Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Housing Urban Planning Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Nalanda Engicon Private Ltd. Patna Thru. Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Housing Urban Planning Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Ziyaul Haque Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of External Affairs New Delhi and 2 Others

Vijay Kumar Pathak Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Finance Deptt. New Delhi and 5 Others

Siddharth (Minor) Thru. His Natural Guardian Father Sunil Kumar Jaunsari and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Social Welfare and 2 Others

Neetu @ Neetu Kanaujia Vs State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate Lko. and 4 Others