Allahabad High Court
Raj Narain vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue ... on 4 October, 2023
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:63810 Court No. - 17 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 826 of 2022 Petitioner :- Raj Narain Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sukhveer Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Sukhveer Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel on behalf of respondent No.s 1 to 4.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed notices to private respondents are dispensed with.
3. By means of the present writ petition in form of public interest litigation, the petitioner has sought a direction to respondent No.s 2 to 4 to remove encroachment / illegal constructions from gata No.s 835 Kha Banjar, 835 Gha Banjar, 837 Khalihan, 898 KHalihan, 899 Khalihan, 835 Ga, Naveen Parti, 236 Shamshan and 838 Shamshan situated in village Rajapurkohra, Tahsil Amethi and District Amethi.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has made several representations to various authorities for removing encroachments from aforesaid gatas. The petitioner had also previously approached this Court by filing writ petition No.11349 (M/B) of 2010 which was dismissed vide order dated 1.12.2010. While dismissing the said writ petition liberty was given to the petitioner to approach the authority with regard to his grievances. It is stated that despite liberty granted by this Court vide order dated 1.12.2010 the petitioner did not move any application to the concerned authorities nor could be indicate any such application having been made to such authorities. It has further been stated that with regard to the said land proceedings under Section 198 (4) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act were initiated at the behest of father of the respondents in relation to gata No.431/1 for cancellation of patta. The said application was allowed by means of order dated 16.11.1998. It has further been stated that a suit has also been filed by the Gaon Sabha in suit No.220/2007-2008 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Satya Narain) under Section 122 Kha of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act and an order for eviction has also been passed. Against the order of eviction Satya Narain has filed an appeal before the Collector, Amethi which has also been dismissed and now it is stated that revision is pending before Divisional Commissioner. It has further been stated that Satya Narain has also filed a regular suit under Section 144 of Revenue Code, 2006 before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amethi relating to gata No.s 835 Kha, 835 Ga, 835 Gha and 838 Ga which is also pending consideration.
5. From the aforesaid, it is clear that several litigation are pending with regard to the said land and it is in aforesaid circumstance that prayer has been made for a direction to the respondents to remove the said encroachment.
6. Learned Standing counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the writ petition. He submits that for the same relief the petitioner had previously approached this Court by filing writ petition No.11349 (M/B) of 2010 which was dismissed on 1.12.2010 with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority. The petitioner has not approached any authority since 2010 but has again filed writ petition seeking the same direction. He submits that the dispute in relation to possession of patta land the revenue authorities have already taken action and orders for eviction have been passed but the the private respondents have availed all the statutory remedy and filed revisions which are pending before the revisional authorities. He submits that appropriate action would be taken once the matters are decided by the Divisional Commissioner.
7. It is in aforesaid circumstances where the matters are pending consideration before various revenue authorities that this Court would not interfere at this stage at the behest of the petitioner who claims to be a public spirited person. The present petition indicates that the petitioner has clearly abused the process of law and once he has already approached this Court and the petition was dismissed with liberty then without availing the liberty granted to the petitioner he has approached this Court yet again for the same relief.
8. Considering that the said issues are already pending before the revenue authorities, no direction as sought by the petitioner can be passed. In light of the above, the petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.
(Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 4.10.2023 RKM.