Ram Charitra vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 25575 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:182194
 
Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2166 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Ram Charitra
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Kumar Singh,Dharnidhar Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Gupta
 

 
Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

Heard Shri Dharnidhar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Jitendra Narain Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents No. 1 to 4 and Shri Kuldeep Singh holding brief of Shri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the Land Management Committee-respondent No. 5.

The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-.

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the responent authorities to remove the illegal encroachment over the Gata No. 9 area 0.0110 hectare by the respondent No. 6 in pursuance of order dated 22.9.2003 passed by Tehsildar/Assistant Collector, Bansi, Siddharth Nagar in Case No. 46/96, under Section 122-B and Rule 115-C of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act in respect of Chak Road (Public Utility Land) situated at village-Gaura, Tappa Asnar, Pargana Bansi Purab, Tehsil Bansi, district Siddharth Nagar and vacate the said land in the larger interest of the public utility."

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the following grounds:-

1. 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. In support of his objection he has also relied upon the recent decision of this Court in the case of Bhoopendra Singh vs. State of U.P. and others; 2023 AHC:173609.

2. The second objection as raised by the leaned Additional Chief Standing Counsel is that by means of the present writ petition the petitioner is seeking the execution of the order dated 22.9.2023 passed by the Tehsildar/Assistant Collector, Bansi Siddharthnagar in Case No. 46/96, under Section 122-B read with Rule 115-C of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. The relief of execution of the decree passed in the aforesaid case cannot be entertained by way of public interest litigation.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the matter at some length submits that he does not want to press the present public interest litigation.

As prayed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to initiate proper proceedings for removal of encroachment from the Gaon Sabha land in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

Order Date :- 20.9.2023

Sumaira