Shivam Chauhan vs State Of U.P. And 10 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 15529 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Shivam Chauhan vs State Of U.P. And 10 Others on 3 May, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:79635
 
Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 853 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Shivam Chauhan
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Sanjeev Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Avinash Chandra Srivastava,C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
 

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

2. This public interest litigation has been filed for following relief:

"(a). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus direct the respondents to take appropriate action with regard to evicting the respondent No. 6 to 11 who have made encroachment over the Gata No. 2666 area 20.145 Hectare situated in Village Jindpur Post GIC Nauner Police Station Dannahar District Mainpuri (which is public utility land) reserved for displaced persons related to East Pakistan and the respondent No. 6 to 11 be vacated over the land mentioned above and aforesaid land be handed over in favour of Gaon Sabha Jindpur Post GIC Nauner Police Station Dannahar District Mainpuri.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to decide and consider representation dated 23.03.2024 of the petitioner with regard to taking appropriate action evicting the respondent No. 6 to 11 who have made encroachment over the Gata No. 2666 area 20.145 Hectare situated in Village Jindpur Post GIC Nauner Police Station Dannahar District Mainpuri (which is public utility land) reserved for displaced persons related to East Pakistan and the respondent No. 6 to 11 be vacated over the land mentioned above and aforesaid land be handed over in favour of Gaon Sabha Jindpur Post GIC Nauner Police Station Dannahar District Mainpuri."

3. 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.

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

5. 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.

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

Order Date :- 3.5.2024

Nitika Sri.

(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)