Sachita Nand Dwivedi vs State Of Up And 9 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 15092 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Sachita Nand Dwivedi vs State Of Up And 9 Others on 1 May, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:77423
 
Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 660 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Sachita Nand Dwivedi
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 9 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rampyare Lal Srivastava,Subash Chandra Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
 

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. The instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed for the following relief :

"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents state authorities to get vacate public land forthwith by removing unauthorized structure erected over the Khatauni No.00350 Khasara No.141/0.3120 hectare (78 decimal), 144/0.1980 hectare (50 decimal), 151/0.0490 hectare (12 decimal) and 162/0.1780 hectare (45 decimal) recorded as Khalihan in the Khatauni no.00350 situated at Village-Jogia Bujurg (Tola-Parsauna), Tehsil- Rudrapur, District Deoria against the respondent no.6 to 10 are illegally occupied public land (Khalihan).

(II). Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents state authorities to undertake penal proceedings and for realize the damage against the person guilty for unauthorized possession and erection of structures of the Khatauni No.0.00350 Khasara No.141/0.3120 hectare (78 decimal), 144/0.1980 hectare (50 decimal), 151/0.0490 hectare (12 decimal) and 162/0.1780 hectare (45 decimal) recorded as Khalihan in the Khatauni no.00350 situated at Village-Jogia Bujurg (Tola-Parsauna), Tehsil- Rudrapur, District Deoria."

3. Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned Counsel appearing for the Gaon Sabha has stated that on inquiry, no encroachment was found. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, vehemently denied this fact.

4. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by moving an application under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 in view of the judgment passed by this Court in Jahar Singh v. State of U.P. reported in 2017(4) ADJ 619 as well as in Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (12) ADJ 226.

5. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to entertain the instant petition.

6. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 67 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law.

7. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 1.5.2024

S. Singh