AMRIT LAL v. THE COLLECTOR / DISTRICT MAGISTRATE PRAYAGRAJ AND 4 OTHERS
WPIL/87/2025 · 2025-01-24
Chandra Kumar Rai
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8387 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8387 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:12434 Court No. - 50 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 87 of 2025 Petitioner :- Amrit Lal Respondent :- The Collector / District Magistrate Prayagraj And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mata Achal Mishra,Vinay Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Azad Rai,C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nand Lal Maurya, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents and Mr. Azad Rai, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent nos. 1 to 4 for eviction of respondent no.5 from the land of chak road of plot no.208, situated in village Gondaura Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj in execution of the
order dated 27.8.2024 passed by respondent no.3 (annexure no.6 to the writ petition).
3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the order passed by the Tehsildar on 27.8.2024 for ejectment and damages in respect to the plot in question, the order has not been given effect to. He submitted that appropriate direction be issued for removal of illegal encroachment from the plot in question in pursuance of the order dated 27.8.2024.
4. Learned standing counsel and the counsel for the gaon sabha submitted that the instant public interest litigation for implementation of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is not maintainable.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
6. There is no dispute about the fact that the order for ejectment and damages has been passed by the Tehsildar in respect to the plot in question on 27.8.2024.
7. For execution of the order passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, remedy is provided under paragraph 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, as such, the instant P.I.L. cannot be maintained for implementation of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
8. The P.I.L. is accordingly disposed of with observation that proper proceeding can be initiated according to the provision contained under Para 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual.
Order Date :- 24.1.2025 C.Prakash Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad