Allahabad High Court
Gangadeen Yadav And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 9 Others on 13 September, 2019
Author: Vivek Kumar Birla
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 30 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2814 of 2018 Petitioner :- Gangadeen Yadav And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Babu Ram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Hare Ram Tripathi,Manoj Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Babu Ram Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Tyagi, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Hare Ram Tripathi, learned counsel for the contesting respondents and perused the record.
Present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 3.10.2017 passed by the Board of Revenue UP Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 19 of 2011-12 (Ramhit vs. State).
A detailed order was passed on 18.7.2019 by this Court and the order sheet reflects that admittedly, regarding exchange of land challenging the order of the Board of Revenue, a writ petition is pending before this Court wherein interim order is operating.
In such view of the matter, I do not find any good ground to continue with the present PIL, more so, in view of the judgement of this Court rendered by Hon'ble Division Bench passed in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 1215 of 2019 (Rahul Kumar Singh vs. State of UP and 4 others) dated 31.5.2019 wherein observation has been made by Hon'ble Division Bench that in such matters involving encroachment of chak road etc., PIL ordinarily, should not be entertained. If there is inaction on the part of the statutory authorities, the aggrieved person can approach this Court for appropriate direction but not by way of PIL. It was, however, left open to work out other remedy available under the law. Relevant paragraphs of the same order are quoted as under:-
"Accordingly, we are of the view that in the matter of removal of encroachment of pathways, drains etc., statutory remedy is available to the persons under the Criminal Procedure Code, the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and under the Acts which govern the local bodies, Nagar Nigams, Municipal Corporations, Nagar Panchayats, Municipalities etc. etc. hence the public interest litigation ordinarily should not be entertained. If there is inaction on the part of statutory authorities, the aggrieved person can approach to this Court for appropriate direction but not by way of PIL.
.................. ............. ............
Accordingly, the public interest litigations are dismissed. However, we make it clear that dismissal of these public interest litigations shall not cause any prejudice to the cause espoused therein. It is left open to the petitioners to work out other remedy available under the law."
In such view of the matter, present PIL is consigned to record, however, with liberty to the petitioner to work out other remedy available under the law as provided by the Hon'ble Division Bench in Rahul Kumar Singh (Supra).
Order Date :- 13.9.2019 Abhishek