Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 195038 (ALL)

RAJESH KUMAR YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE LKO. AND 8 OTHERS

WPIL/1148/2025 · 2025-11-15

Subhash Vidyarthi

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1148 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Prabhat Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rahul Shukla, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, Sri Mohan Singh, the learned counsel for the opposite party no.9/Gaon Sabha. 2. By means of the instant petition filed in public interest the petitioner has sought a direction in the nature of mandamus to the opposite parties no.1 to 4 for removal of illegal encroachment of opposite parties no.5 to 8 over Plot No.44, situated in Village Paghara, Pargana Bidhar, Tehsil Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar, which is a raasta and is recorded as a public utility land. 3. On the basis of written instructions provided by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Alapur, Ambedkar Nagar the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has informed the court that the proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code have been instituted against the opposite party no.5 which are pending. A notice for removal of encroachment has been issued to the opposite party no.7 and further action shall be taken in accordance with law. The proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code were instituted against the opposite parties no.6 and 8 and the same were decided and thereafter the aforesaid opposite parties have filed applications for recall of the order which is still pending Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajendra Prasad Verma, Prabhat Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Rajesh Kumar Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s) and the authority concerned shall take suitable decision on the application and thereafter the necessary action shall be taken in accordance with law. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of by directing the opposite parties no.2 to 4 to ensure expeditious conclusion of proceedings pending against the opposite parties no.5 and 8 and to take necessary action in accordance with law with expedition. November 15, 2025 Ram. WPIL No. 1148 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench