Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40573 (ALL)

RAHUL KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WPIL/777/2025 · 2025-07-27

Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:123885-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 777 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rahul Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and 3 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harsh Vardhan Shastri Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Akanksha Sharma (S.C.), Sunil Kumar Singh Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction against respondent No. 4 in light of order dated 12.03.2025 (Annexure No. 14 to the writ petition). 2. A perusal of the petition indicates that on proceedings initiated under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 ('Code') against respondent No. 4, order dated 12.03.2025 was passed holding that the respondent No. 4 was in encroachment over the land in question and order was passed for removal as well as recovery and compensation. 3. When the matter came up before this Court, respondents were directed to seek instructions in the matter as to what action is proposed against respondent No. 4, who is the Gram Pradhan, under Section 95(1)(g) of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. 4. Instructions have been produced that against the order dated 12.03.2025, respondent No. 4 has filed appeal before the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Hapur, wherein the next date fixed is 01.08.2025 and that once the proceedings in appeal are concluded, based on the outcome, action would be initiated against respondent No. 4. 5. Counsel for the petitioner expressed apprehension that as the proceedings against respondent No. 4 have been initiated by the Land Management Committee of the Gram Panchayat, the respondent No. 4, who is the Gram Pradhan, would influence the said proceedings. 6. The very fact that order dated 12.03.2025 has been passed under Section 67 of the Code on the complaint made by the Lekhpal, wherein the order has been passed against respondent No. 4, we do not find any basis for such apprehension as the Lekhpal, would be now respondent in the pending appeal, would take care of the interest of the Gram Panchayat. 7. In view of the above fact situation, wherein the order dated 12.03.2025, which has formed basis for filing of the present petition, is presently pending appeal, no further orders are required to be passed in the present public interest litigation, the same stands disposed of. 8. It is expected of the State to ensure that the pending appeal is appropriately contested. Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Mukesh Pal/Sharad (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad