Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 76051 (ALL)

PRAVEEN KUMAR MALIK v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/23224/2025 · 2025-09-14

Rohit Ranjan Agarwal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 23224 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. Instructions have come up, which are taken on record. 2. According to the instructions, the construction of marriage hall over the land in question had been stopped by the revenue authorities. 3. Shri Rakesh Pande, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 5 submits that already an application has been moved before the Commissioner for exchanging the public utility land with some other land so that the facility which is being enjoyed by the people residing in the village may be shifted to some other place so that the marriage hall be constructed over the present land. He further submits that the land in lieu of the present disputed land shall be allotted at some other place from the land of the Gaon Sabha. He also submits that a direction may be issued to the Commissioner, Saharanpur, to expedite the proceeding for exchange and decide the same strictly in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he may also be given the opportunity of being heard before the order is passed by the Commissioner. 5. As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending or calling for counter affidavit, the Commissioner, Saharanpur is hereby required to proceed with the application for exchange submitted by the respondent no. 5 strictly in accordance with law and take a final call, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. None of parties shall seek any Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mahendra Ram Maurya, S.S. Sharma Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kaushal Kishore Mani Praveen Kumar Malik .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) adjournment in the matter and the Commissioner shall decide the same on the date fixed by him. 6. Till the decision is taken by the Commissioner, the construction activity shall not be carried out. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. September 15, 2025 A. V. Singh WRIC No. 23224 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJAY VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad