Back
2016 Supreme(All) 2669
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
V.K. Shukla, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, JJ.
Om Prakash Bind - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. And 9 Ors. - Respondent
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. - 33364 of 2016
Decided On : 22-07-2016
For the Petitioner: Dheeraj Kumar Yadav.
For the Respondent: C.S.C.
The petitioner should pursue the available remedy under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, rather than seeking a writ of mandamus.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Land Encroachment - The court held that the petitioner should pursue the remedy available under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, rather than seeking a writ of mandamus.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to initiate proceedings against respondents trying to encroach on Gram Sabha land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner should pursue the remedy available under the relevant Acts instead of seeking a writ of mandamus.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioner should be permitted to bypass the provisions of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of the Acts and previous judgments to conclude that the petitioner should pursue the available remedy under the Acts.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the remedy available under the relevant Acts.
Om Prakash Bind is before this Court with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 3 and 4 to initiate the proceedings against respondent nos. 5 to 10 as they are trying to encroach the land of Gram Sabha i.e. Arazi No. 71-Ka, Area .243 Hectare situated at Mauja Madhaipur, Post Seura, District Jaunpur, which is recorded as Banjar in the revenue records.
2. U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 is a self contained Act and therein under Section 122-B of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950 (in short "the Act of 1950"), a comprehensive procedure has been provided for wherein order of ejectment as well as damages can be imposed. A Division Bench of this Court in Misc. Bench No. - 9514 of 2014 (P.I.L.) (Ram Sijore Vs. State of U.P. & others) has already taken a view that in such a matters once a full fledged mechanism has been provided for to remedy the situation, then the said remedy should be invoked, as such, there is no occasion for this Court to permit the petitioner to by-pass the provisions, as is provided for under Section 122-B of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950.
3. As on date the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 (U.P. Act No.VIII of 2012) (in short "the Code") has been enacted by the Uttar Pradesh Legislature to consolidate and amend the law relating to land tenures and land revenue in the State of U.P. and which is holding the field, wherein full fledged mechanism has been provided for pursuing the proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned. Section 67 of the Code deals with power to prevent damage, misappropriation and wrongful occupation of Gram Panchayat property. In Section 136 exhaustive procedure has been provided for, wherein order of ejectment as well as damages can be imposed, which is analogous provisions of Section 122-B of the Act of 1950 and in which it is provided that if the encroachment is on a public utility land, proceedings under Section 136 of the Code are available to be adopted.
4. Once full fledged mechanism has been provided for in the Code, in view of this, and as per the judgment of this Court in Ram Sijore (Supra), the petitioner should pursue his remedy as is available to him.
The writ petition is disposed of.
