SUNIL SHUKLA ALIAS SUNIL KUMAR SHUKLA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOUSING AND URBAN PLANNING CIVIL SECTT. LKO AND OTHERS
WRIC/3945/2025 · 2025-04-29
Om Prakash Shukla, Rajan Roy
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135941 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135941 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24296-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3945 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sunil Shukla Alias Sunil Kumar Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Civil Sectt. Lko And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Upadhyay,Diksha Tiwari,Sanjana Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Puneet Chandra Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
1. Heard.
2. Petitioner claims registration of his name in respect of the property bearing house no.D-2042 situated at Indira Nagar Yojana, Lucknow based on a registered will, however, another person i.e. Shanti Singh who is opposite party no.4 claims to be in possession and also that she has original documents relating to the house in question. It is not disputed by Sri Puneet Chandra,
learned counsel for Awas Evam Vikas Parishad that the house was allotted in the name of Sri Devdutt Shukla who has died. According to the petitioner he died on 06.11.2009 after allegedly executing and getting registered a will deed dated 03.07.2000. However, it is only in May, 2023 as informed by petitioner's counsel that an application was submitted by the petitioner based on the aforesaid will for recording his name in the records of Awas Vikas Parishad which had developed the colony. The officer of Awas Vikas Parishad has declined to do so on account of aforesaid rival and absence of original documents with the petitioner.
3. We do not find it a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India especially as at least as of now there are not sufficient documents on record to enable this Court to draw even an inference that the petitioner has been in possession since 2009 or prior to it. Merely because, the petitioner has got house assessment in his name may not be a conclusive factor so far as writ petition is concerned.Complicated questions of title and possession may be involved which the authority could not decide nor can we. Petitioner may pursue the matter
before the civil court if there is a cause.
4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.)
Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Shanu/- Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench