Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 174988 (ALL)

SMT. SARLA DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE LKO. AND 5 OTHERS

WRIC/10591/2025 · 2025-10-31

Amitabh Kumar Rai, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10591 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding to the opp.party no. 5 Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Lucknow to take appropriate action upon the application of the petitioner dated 23-09-2025 contained as annexure no. 5." 3. The respondent no. 6 in the Writ Petition is one Ajay Kumar Soni, who is a private person and residing in the same locality. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that he, along with one Sarju Prasad S/o Dhakhan, had bought Plot No.5, area 1500 sq. ft., from Khadi Gramodyog Sahkari Awas Samiti on 20.12.2001 through a registered sale deed and has raised construction over the land and has been residing therein for the past 20 years. The respondent no.6 is the neighbour for the past 15 years. Towards the North of the house of the petitioner, there is a vacant land of 96 sq. ft. The respondent no. 6 has encroached upon the vacant land and is making construction thereon. The petitioner has made several complaints Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shiv Shankar Singh, Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Ravindra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Namit Sharma Smt. Sarla Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) to the appropriate authorities, including the District Administration and the Police, but nothing has been done. He has also lodged the F.I.R. against the respondent no. 6. Since no relief has been made available to the petitioner, she has approached this Court. 5. The petitioner prays for a mandamus to the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, to take appropriate action against the respondent no. 6. 6. The petitioner as well as the respondent no.6 are both private persons. It would be appropriate that the petitioner approaches the Civil Court for remedy against the Respondent no.6. 7. The petition stands dismissed. October 31, 2025 Rahul WRIC No. 10591 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench