Amitabh vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 18234 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Amitabh vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 21 May, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:91013
 
Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 856 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Amitabh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Afzal Husain,C.S.C.,Shahnawaz Khan
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
 

C. M. Impleadment Application No. 3 of 2024

1. Impleadment application is allowed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to carry out necessary amendment in the array of parties during the course of the day.

Order in petition

1. Instruction has been placed before this Court today and the same is taken on record.

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

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

"a). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents specially directing the respondent no. 2 to remove the illegal encroachment of the respondent no. 4 to 6 from the Gata No. 213 Gha Rakba 0.0200 Hect, Gata No. 213 da Rakba .0160 Hect, Gata No. 423 Rakba 0.2100 Hect, Gata No. 313 Rakba .0280 Hect which is mentioned as Putli dalne hetu, Holika Dahan, Shamshan, Devstahan Land in the revenue records forthwith direct the respondent no. 2 to take necessary steps to demark the Gata No. 213 Gha Rakba 0.0200 Hect, Gata no. 213 da Rakba .0160 Hect, Gata No. 423 Rakba 0.2100 Hect, Gata No. 313 Rakba .0280 Hect so that the Putli dalne hetu, Holika Dahan, Shamshan, Devsthan land may be free from encroachment and the petitioner and villagers may use the Putli dalne hetu, Holika Dahan, Shamshan, Devstahan land for their convenience; otherwise the applicant/ petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

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 26 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 26 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 :- 21.5.2024

Ved Prakash

(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)