Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Kumar Dhuriya vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 7 April, 2023
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 5
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 277 of 2023
Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar Dhuriya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Kumar Singh,Avinash Chandra Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents no.1 to 4. Notice for opposite party no.5/Gaon Sabha has been accepted by Sri Pankaj Gupta.
In view of the proposed order, notices to private opposite parties are hereby dispensed with.
By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed following main reliefs:-
"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Public Interest Litigation thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties particularly opposite party No. 2 to 4 to get vacate the Gaon Sabha lands from encroachers i.e. Gata No.936 area 6-10-3 which is recorded as pond in the revenue record of village Panchayat Kashipur Dubki, Tehsil Kunda, Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh.
(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Public Interest Litigation thereby commanding and directing the opposite party No. 1 to 4 to look into the matter and take necessary step for removal of encroachment by the encroachers from Gata No. 936 area 6-10-3 which is recorded as pond in the revenue record of village Panchayat Kashipur Dubki, Tehsil Kunda, Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh."
Learned Standing Counsel has produced a letter dated 25.03.2023 preferred by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kunda, Pratapgarh addressing to the Chief Standing Counsel of this Court, the same is taken on record.
As per the aforesaid instructions, there is no dispute that Gata No.936 Minjumla is recorded as pond land having area 0.291 hectare. So far as the area of the pond is concerned, which has been indicated in the prayer no.1 of the writ petition, there is no dispute but on account of some anomaly and wrong indication of the tenure holder etc., the required exercise has been undertaken by filing Case No.1211/2023, Computerized Case No.T202302570101211, State of U.P. Vs. Jokhu Lal alias Jokhai and others, under Section 31/32 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as "Code, 2006") wherein the next date has been fixed for 11.04.2023. Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions has informed that as soon as the proceedings of the aforesaid case are concluded and the revenue records are corrected, the pond shall be restored on the same area, which has been recorded in the revenue record. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the aforesaid pond has lost its about 80-90% area and if the appropriate action is not taken by the competent revenue authority, the pond in question would definitely loose its identity and that would be in derogation of the judgment of Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamala Devi & Others, Civil Appeal No.4787 of 2001, passed by the Apex Court.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having perused the material available on record, considering the letter dated 25.03.2023 and without entering into merits of the issue, I do not find any good ground to keep this PIL pending any longer inasmuch as one suit is pending consideration before the competent authority under Section 31/32 of the Code, 2006 for correction of the records and after conclusion of proceedings of the aforesaid suit, appropriate exercise restoring the pond in its original area would be undertaken. Therefore, the competent authority is directed to conclude the aforesaid suit, with expedition, strictly in accordance with law, by affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, within time frame as prescribed under the law and after final disposal of the aforesaid case, the pond in question having same area as has been recorded in the revenue record on Gata No.936 minjumla shall be restored forthwith.
It is always open for the petitioner to file appropriate petition before the appropriate court of law, if the pond in question is not restored on the gata in question having same area as has been recorded in the revenue record.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]
Order Date :- 7.4.2023
RBS/-
