RAHUL YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 8 OTHERS
WPIL/374/2025 · 2025-04-18
Ajai Kumar Srivastava I, Attau Rahman Masoodi
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134594 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134594 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21948-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 374 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rahul Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahesh Kumar Sharma,Uma Kant Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
1. Sri Vivek Kumar Verma, learned counsel has filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite parties no.6 to 8, which is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. Sri Vivek Kumar Verma, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of opposite parties no.6 to 8.
3. It is not in dispute that gata no.2644 Kha is recorded as 'usar' (barren land). Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State on the basis of instructions has stated that gata no.2644 kha recorded as 'usar' (barren land) for the purposes of its identity became a subject matter of demarcation due to the reason that an injunction suit was filed by some local residents against the construction of drainage over the same. Although an order of status-quo has been passed by the civil court with respect to the abadi area which may have been claimed as appurtenant land but the construction of drainage is strictly maintained on the gaon sabha land recorded as usar (barren).
4. The construction of drainage appears to have been initiated after demarcation and identity of the
said land which is evident from the documents placed on record.
5. Thus, the construction of drainage under these circumstances cannot be allowed to be interfered with upon the gaon sabha land and any grievance regarding the construction being made over any part of abadi land as might be the case in the pending suit is open to be adjudicated before the competent civil court by the party aggrieved.
6. With these observations, the writ petition filed in public interest is disposed of.
7. It is also made clear that no part of the gaon sabha land including the pathway encroached upon, if any, may be allowed to be usurped by any unauthorised person. (Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. ) (Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.) Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Shahnaz Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench