Allahabad High Court
Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava Charitable Trust vs State Of Up And 2 Others on 4 July, 2024
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:108608-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20574 of 2024 Petitioner :- Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava Charitable Trust Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saurabh Raj Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Brijendra Kumar,C.S.C.,Pawan Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Raj Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pawan Kumar Singh, learned counsel the Prayagraj Development Authority.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Bhargava Kothi, located at 334 Nai Basti, Kydganj, Prayagraj, is an old family residence on Shankar Lal Bhargava Road. The property has been in the Bhargava family for over 100 years. Late Baikunth Nath Bhargava created the Kanhaiya Bhargava Charitable Trust in 1970, bequeathing the Kothi to the trust in his will dated 28.09.2001. After the death of Sulekha Bhargava, the managing trustee, Manik Bhargava, is now managing the property.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the three-storied Kothi is situated on a municipal road and has significant historical and structural features, including a portico supported by 14 pillars. This portico was purchased from the Allahabad Municipal Board in 1922. The Prayagraj Development Authority issued a notice on 10.05.2024, claiming the front portion of the Kothi (including the portico) as an encroachment and ordered its removal for city development.
4. The petitioner, Manik Bhargava, replied to the notice on 13.05.2024 and subsequently filed a civil suit being Original Suit No. 676 of 2024 (Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava Vs. P.D.A. Prayagraj), in which no injunction has been granted in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition before this Court being Matter Under Article 227 No. 7594 of 2024 (Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava Charitable Trust Vs. Prayagraj Development Authority and another).
5. Despite the ongoing legal proceedings, the authorities threatened to demolish the structure on 08.06.2024 and 10.06.2024.
6. Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Prayagraj Development Authority submits that there is nothing on record to indicate or suggest that the map was ever sanctioned. He further submits that the petitioner himself has instituted a suit for injunction against Prayagraj Development Authority, which is said to be pending consideration and instead of pressing injunction application, the petitioner has approached this court indirectly for injunction.
7. Heard rival submissions and perused the record.
8. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed an Original Suit No. 676 of 2024 (Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava Vs. PDA, Prayagraj) against the notices dated 10-05-2024 and 22-05-2024. Once his injunction application has not been considered, the petitioner instituted another proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being Matters Under Article 227 No. 7594 of 2024 (Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava Charitable Trust Vs. Prayagraj Development Authority and another). For ready reference, the relevant portion of the order dated 07-06-2024 is quoted as under:-
" Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.K. Ojha, learned counsel appearing for Prayagraj Development Authority, Prayagraj.
By means of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, petitioner is aggrieved for non consideration of interim relief by the trial court which has just issued notice upon his application for temporary injunction and the suit instituted for permanent prohibitory injunction.
Now it is stated that 29.07.2024 is the date fixed in the suit.
Sri Ojha on the contrary argues that petitioner was served with a notice by Prajagraj Development Authority, Prayagraj as he had raised construction over and above the drain and also certain part of public land which is road and upon his reply being submitted, an order has been passed by the competent authority on 22.05.2024 which is not challenged.
Now, since both the parties are represented before this Court they are directed to appear before the trial court on the next date fixed which is 29.07.2024 on that date, the court will consider the application of petitioner for grant in interim injunction in the matter after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of. "
9. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 07-06-2024 has observed that the parties may appear before the trial court on the next date fixed which is 29-07-2024. On that date, the court will consider the application of petitioner for granting interim injunction in the matter after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties.
10. In this background, the objection is being raised by the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner himself has instituted a suit for injunction against Prayagraj Development Authority, which is said to be pending consideration and instead of pressing injunction application, the petitioner has approached this court indirectly for injunction. Even otherwise, there is nothing on record to indicate or suggest that the map was ever sanctioned.
11. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, once the Court has declined to entertain the writ petition and shown its willingness to dismiss the writ petition with exemplary cost, learned counsel for the petitioner states that present writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed and leave may be accorded to press the relief before the competent court.
12. Accordingly, present writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed with leave as aforesaid.
Order Date :- 4.7.2024 pks