Allahabad High Court
Jagdish Narayan Mishra vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 28 February, 2020
Author: Vivek Varma
Bench: Vivek Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 6 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 414 of 2020 Petitioner :- Jagdish Narayan Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Kant Vishwakarma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents, Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4- Gaon Sabha, and Sri Ashok Kumar Dwivedi and Sri Himanshu Pandey, learned Advocates, who have entered appearance on behalf of respondent no. 5.
By means of the present writ petition in the form of public interest litigation the petitioner seeks a direction upon the authorities concerned to remove the encroachment made over Araji Nos. 963, 964 and 965, situated in Village Dhaurahara (Dhaurahara Dehati), Pargana Mungra, Tehsil Machhalishahar, District Jaunpur, which are recorded as Talab, Navin Parti and Khanti respectively.
The petitioner alleges that encroachment has been made over the aforesaid public utility lands of Gaon Sabha.
Learned Standing Counsel states that the petitioner has a statutory remedy available under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, under which he may approach the authority concerned for the redressal of his grievance.
Since a statutory remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the Court is not inclined to entertain the petition. However, the petitioner is permitted to file a comprehensive representation to the concerned Assistant Collector, who shall, upon verification of facts, initiate a proceeding under Section 67 of the Code, if the facts and circumstances of the case so justify. In the event, such proceeding is initiated, an expeditious decision shall be taken thereon in accordance with law, preferably within a period of four months from the date of making such a representation.
It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. All facts shall be subject to due verification and any proceeding that may be adopted will be with due notice to all the affected parties.
With these observations, the petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 28.2.2020 SKT/-