Radha Raman & Others vs State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 7337 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 39
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 945 of 2011
 
Petitioner :- Radha Raman & Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Finance & Revenue & Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Singh,P.N. Dwivedi,S.S. Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,R.V. Pathak
 

 
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel and Sri Tarun Kumar Singh, Advocate.

Petitioner before this Court has come up with following prayer:

"I.    Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to declare the petitioner as Bhumidhar over the Plots Khasra No. 1 M area 0.70 Acre, Khasra No. 162 M area 1.00 Acre, and Khasra  No. 304 M area 1.30 acre situated in village Jaisinghpura Khadar Pargana Mathura Tehsil Sadar District Mathura.

II.    Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in peaceful possession of the petitioner over the Plots Khasra No. 1 M area 0.70 Acre, Khasra No. 162 M area 1.00 acre and Khasra No. 304 M. area 1.30 acre situated in village Jaisinghpura Khadra Pargana Mathura Tehsil Sadar District Mathura."

From the supplementary affidavit, which has been so filed it is clearly reflected that over the land in question constructions are being raised and it appears that without getting Map sanctioned from the Development Authority in question, said constructions in question are being carried out.

In para-6 of the supplementary affidavit it has been mentioned that District Urban Development Authority Mathura came with JCV machine to demolish the boundary wall of the petitioner.

Precise query was put to learned counsel for the petitioner, as to whether  he has got Map sanctioned from the Development Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not at all in a position to give reply of the said query made by the Court. 

Once all these material facts are not available with the learned counsel for the petitioner then writ petition in question cannot be entertained and accordingly same is dismissed.

However it is made clear that in case action is being taken against the petitioner and petitioner has got sanctioned map,and constructions are being carried out accordingly, then he can approach the Vice Chairman of the Authority and can also question the validity of the said action before the concern Commissioner who happens to be the Chairman as well as before the State Government under Section 41(3) of the 1973 Act.

Consequently, present writ petition is dismissed.  

(Suneet Kumar, J.)        (V.K. Shukla,J.)

Order Date :- 9.12.2013

Dhruv