Allahabad High Court
Mohani Pandey vs State Of U P And 4 Others on 8 September, 2020
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 71 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12320 of 2020 Petitioner :- Mohani Pandey Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhagwan Dutt Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vineet Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Shri Bhagwan Dutt Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondents.
The present writ petition has been preferred with following reliefs:
(i) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to 4 to get stop the illegal construction being made by respondent no. 5 over the land in dispute being arazi no. 30 Ka sitautated in Village-Chaupariya, Tehsil-Mahrajganj Sadar, District-Mahrajganj.
(ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to 4 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for getting stopped the illegal construction being made by respondent no. 5 over the land in dispute being arazi no. 320 Ka situated in Vilage-Chaupariya, Tehsil-mahrajganj Sadar, District Maharajganj.
(iii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 3 to consider and decide the case being case No. D-200547000172, Mohani Pandey & others v. Ramroop singh Tomar and others, under section 30 (2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as well as stay application dated 13.07.2020 filed in the aforesaid pending case, pending before Additional Collector (Finance and Revenue) Mahrajganj within stipulated period and till then status quo be maintained over the land in dispute.
Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondents has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has already invoked the remedy available to him under law and approached the Civil Court for injunction and the same has already been accorded by the Civil Court by passing injunction in favour of the petitioner on 2nd September, 2020, and as such he submits that whatever relief has been prayed before this Court the same has already been accorded by the competent forum. In case, he is aggrieved then definitely he can approach the forum for appropriate relief. Simultaneously the present relief cannot be drawn.
In the facts and circumstances of the case once, the Court has already interfered in the matter, accorded injunction and the parties have to put their appearance in the said proceedings, and therefore, there is no reason or occasion to proceed any further in the present matter. However, it is always open to the petitioner to avail his remedy before the appropriate Court.
So far as the third relief is concerned, it is always open to the applicant to move an appropriate application before the competent authority in case the same is maintainable and after inviting objections by the contesting respondents the authority shall proceed to finalize the said proceedings strictly in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.9.2020 Deepak/