Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1473 (ALL)

Daya Shankar Yadav v. State of U. P.

2018-07-04

SALIL KUMAR RAI

body2018
JUDGMENT : SALIL KUMAR RAI, J. 1. The present writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus directing respondent no.3 to remove certain alleged illegal encroachments from Plot No.667 (area 0.6320 hectares) situated in Village-Barmohani, Post & Tehsil-Bhadohi, District Sant Ravidas Nagar, Bhadohi, which is recorded in the revenue record as 'Khalihan'. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.3 and in paragraph 14 of the said counter affidavit, it has been stated that after enquiry, 21 persons were found to be in illegal occupation over the plot and against the said persons, proceedings under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 2006 read with Rule 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 were instituted. It has further been stated in the counter affidavit that cases against four persons have already been decided and orders for eviction of the illegal occupants from the aforesaid plot have been passed by the concerned Assistant Collector. It has also been stated that cases instituted under Section 67 of the Code 2006 against the 17 other persons are still pending. 3. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioner wherein it has been stated that even the persons against whom orders under Section 67 of the Code 2006 have already been passed, have not yet been evicted from the aforesaid Plot No.667. 4. In view of the fact that actions against persons in illegal occupation of Gaon Sabha land have already been initiated under the relevant law, no purpose would be served to keep the present writ petition pending. 5. The Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Sant Ravidas Nagar, Bhadohi (respondent no.3) is directed to decide the cases under Section 67 of the Code 2006 instituted and pending against the 17 persons, as mentioned in paragraph 14 of the counter affidavit, within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him and the consequential action, in case the said orders are adverse to the aforesaid 17 persons, shall be taken by respondent no.3 within a period of three weeks thereafter. Respondent no.3 is also directed that 4 persons against whom cases under Section 67 of the Code 2006 have already been decided and against whom orders for eviction have been passed by respondent no.3, shall be physically evicted from the aforesaid plot, within a period of two weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. It is clarified that the consequential actions referred above shall be taken only if there is no interim order of any Court staying the operation of the orders passed under Section 67 of the Code 2006. 6. A counter affidavit has also been filed by respondent no.7 which is taken on record. In the aforesaid counter affidavit, respondent no.7 has stated that previously also, proceedings were instituted against him under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and the said proceedings were dropped by an order of the concerned Tehsildar and, therefore, proceedings under Section 67 of the Code 2006 are not maintainable. The aforesaid contention of respondent no.7 relates to the merits of the case which shall be considered by the Assistant Collector in the proceedings under Section 67 of the Code 2006 pending against respondent no.7. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.