Svami Nath Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1880 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 41 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Svami Nath Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Fisheries Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. And 7 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd.Yasin
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred by the petitioner, Svami Nath Yadav, challenging the auction dated 29.11.2021 and recommendation of confirmation of the auction dated 13.04.2022 of pond situated in Plot No. 1614 Gha, measuring 10.3930 hectare in Village Marhara, Pargana Surhurpur, Tehsil Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, in favour of respondent no.8.

Heard Shri Mohd. Yasin, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Shri Nishant Shukla, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 1 to 6, Shri Mohan Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent no.7/Gaon Sabha and perused the material brought on record.

Placing reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarguja Transport Service Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior and others : AIR 1987 SC 88, learned Chief Standing Counsel has contended that earlier for the same cause of action and claiming the same relief, the petitioner had filed Writ-C No. 7149 of 2022 before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.12.2022 without permission to institute a fresh petition in respect of same cause of action, but even then, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for the same cause of action. Hence in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Sarguja Transport Service (Supra), the instant writ petition is not maintainable.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the fact that for the same cause of action and for the same relief, the petitioner has earlier filed Writ-C No. 7149 of 2022, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 13.12.2022.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find force in the submission of the learned Chief Standing Counsel that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarguja Transport Service (supra), the instant writ petition is not maintainable. Moreso, the petitioner has not made due disclosure as required by sub-rule (3A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 which was amended in view of the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal & Ors. : 2010 AIR SCW 1029.

For the reasons aforesaid, the instant Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable and is, accordingly, dismissed.

.

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 18.1.2023

Ajit/-