RAJENDRA AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. REVENUE AND 4 OTHERS
/1174/2025 · 2025-11-24
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 178969 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 178969 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1174 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.
1. Instructions are taken on record.
2. Heard Ms. Swati Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Anil Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned State Counsel and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Horticulture Department is going to make a park on the land which is being used by the petitioners and other villagers as a pathway and that is the only ingress and egress access of the petitioners and other villagers.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has submitted that the Horticulture Department has not been arrayed as respondent in the array of respondents in the present Public Interest Litigation, though he has received an instruction from the Tehsildar, Sadar, District Gonda that before closing of ingress and egress due to the construction or raising of a park, an alternative pathway would be provided to the villagers for the ingress and egress access on gata no. 667 and 662.
5. On being asked from learned counsel for the petitioner as to who is the owner of the land, the petitioners or some other individual, she has very fairly replied that the land belongs to the Horticulture Department, on which no chak mark is mentioned in the revenue Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Rajendra And 5 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
records.
6. As per the submission made by the learned State Counsel, on the basis of the instructions received from the respondent no. 4, as mentioned above that a pathway will be provided prior to developing a park, hence nothing is required to be decided and the present public interest litigation stands finally disposed of. November 24, 2025 DiVYa WPIL No. 1174 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench