RAKESH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND 11 OTHERS
WRIC/2033/2025 · 2025-03-05
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 125959 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 125959 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13387 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2033 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rakesh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Misra,Sonam Kumari Thapa Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel. 3. The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 2 to 6 to remove the depredation/encroachment so made by the private respondents upon Gram Sabha Land recorded as Chak Marg no. 167 situated in Village- Mansurpur, Block-Mallawan, Tehsil-Bilgram, District-Hardoi thereby impeding the day to day movement of the petitioner and others villagers from carrying out their agricultural activities, in the interest of justice. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 2 to 6 to carry out a ground level enquiry in respect of the illegal encroachment so made by the private respondents upon Gram Sabha land recorded as Chak Marg and ensure clearance of the same, in the interest of justice."
4. Learned Standing Counsel based upon instructions states that the alleged encroachments have been removed and the Chak marg is vacant. 5. The Counsel for the petitioner disputed the said contention by arguing that the Chak Marg was created from the land owned by the petitioner only to harass him. She argues that the entire exercise of creating etc. from the land of the petitioner is violated the rights of the petitioner vested by Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. 6. As the issue with regard to allocation of the Chak Marg has to be seen at the time of demarcation proceedings, no relief can be granted at this stage. The writ petition is dismissed. 7.
However, as the petitioner has approached the District Magistrate by filing an application, the District Magistrate shall look into the entire facts with regard to the illegal cutting of the road from the land of the petitioner and shall take suitable action in accordance with law with all expedition preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 akverma Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench