Ram Autar And 11 Others vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 36470 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ram Autar And 11 Others vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 22 December, 2023

Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:242841-DB
 
Court No. - 40
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42717 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Ram Autar And 11 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Kumar Yadav,Dharmendra Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- CSC
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
 

Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents.

2. In pith and substance, the petitioners are alleging that private individuals are interfering in peaceful possession of the petitioners and the State respondents are also supporting them.

3. On the other hand, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel has vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that highly disputed facts have been raised, which cannot be adjudicated under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. Moreover, several suits are pending consideration between the parties and even the petitioners have also preferred civil suits for the property in question. If the petitioners are aggrieved, they may avail common law remedy as available in law or they may press their relief in the ongoing suit proceedings.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as respectfully considering the judgment cited at Bar, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter.

5. Once the Court has declined to interfere in the matter, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have preferred Civil Suit No.229 of 2022 (Khan Chand v. State of U.P. & Ors.); Civil Suit No.230 of 2022 (Ram Avtar v. State of U.P. & Ors.) and Original Suit No. 231 of 2022 along with injunction applications but till date the injunction applications have not been decided and as such direction may be issued to the court concerned to decide the injunction application within stipulated period.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, the writ petition stands disposed of with observation that in case the injunction application in the aforesaid suits are still pending consideration, it is expected from the civil court to take appropriate steps so that said applications may be decided without any further delay.

Order Date :- 22.12.2023

SP/