Raj Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. And 10 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 17372 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140681
 
Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1524 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

Heard Sri Vijay Kumar holding brief of Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri L.M. Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3, Sri Himanshu Shukla holding brief of Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha.

The present Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following relief:

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 (Assistant Collector, Jakhania) to take action against the authorized encroachers for removing unauthorized encroachment over the Pokhari Arazi no. 202 area 0.7600 hectare, Arazi No. 213 area 0.1450 hectare, Arazi No. 215 area about 0.0930 hectare, Arazi no. 203 area about 0.7590 hectare, Pashuchar Arazi No. 517 area about 0.8350 hectare, Arazi No 548San. area about 0.3220 hectare, Arazi No. 550 Kha San 5.7250, Arazi no.550San. area about 0.1890 hectare, Arazi No. 550San. area about 0.1260 hectare, Arazi no.San 546 area about 0.2400 hectare, Arazi no.San 548 area about 0.2530 hectate, Arazi no. 548San.0.2530 hectare, Arazi No. 543 area about 0.3920 and Arazi No. 544 area about 3.0730 hectare situated at Village and Post Baseva, Tehsil Jakhania, District Ghazipur within a stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present Public Interest Litigation as the petitioner has not disclosed the credentials and other details that are required under Sub-Rule (3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules (Rules of Court, 1952), which has been amended in the light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttranchal versus Balwant Singh Chaufal & others reported in 2010 AIR SCW 1029.

Learned Standing Counsel has also pointed out that earlier also the same petitioner filed a PIL bearing PIL No. 165 of 2023 (Raj Kumar Singh Versus State of U.P. and others) which was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file afresh petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to explain the credentials which is basic requirement for filing PIL in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of judgments and subsequently that has been made mandatory in view of the provisions of the Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules (Rules of Court, 1952).

In view of the aforesaid, the petition is liable to be dismissed for want of the compliance of the statutory provisions as discussed above.

The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 14.7.2023

K.K. Maurya