Hon’ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.—Heard Sri Adarsh Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Avnish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is sufficient. The delay in filing the special appeal is hereby condoned.

Application is allowed.

Office is directed to allot regular number to the present special appeal.

3. This litigation is a classic example of how a Private Interest Litigation (PIL) could be filed in the name of Public Interest Litigation (PIL).

4. One Suresh Chandra Sharma proclaiming himself to be a public spirited person, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) bearing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4142 of 2018, before the learned Single Judge of this Court, seeking removal of alleged encroachment on the Khasra No. 1197, situated at Ward No. 2 which belongs to Gaon Sabha, Village Kharkhauda, District Meerut, U.P by the private respondents.

5. In para No. 4 of the Writ Petition, the PIL petitioner has specifically mentioned that :

“That the petitioner has no personal interest in the controversy raised by him in this writ petition and also he has no personal gain in the issue raised by him in the instant writ petition. The petitioner specifically states that he has no personal dispute pending or was in past against the respondents herein.”

6. The learned Single Judge without prima facie verifying the credentials and without ascertaining the correctness of the contents of the petition, has entertained the PIL.

7. The learned Single Judge without calling for reply from respondent, disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 13.8.2018, by directing the PIL petitioner to submit a representation before the Assistant Collector bringing the relevant facts regarding encroachment and thereafter the concerned Authority shall initiate the procedure prescribed under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 r/w Rules 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016. The order states that :

“It would serve no purpose to keep the writ petition pending, and therefore, it is directed that petitioner may submit a representation before the Assistant Collector bringing the relevant facts regarding encroachment over the aforesaid plot to the notice of the concerned Assistant Collector who, if no proceedings under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 have already been registered in relation to encroachment over the said plot, on receiving the aforesaid representation shall inquire into the allegations made by the petitioner after following the procedure prescribed under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 read with Rule 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 and pass appropriate orders within a period of six months from the date when the aforesaid representation is filed by the petitioner. In case the allegations of the petitioner are found to be true the Assistant Collector shall ensure that the encroachments over the Gaon Sabha property are removed within a period of one month thereafter unless the order of Assistant Collector is stayed by any superior authority or Court in any appeal or revision filed against the order of Assistant Collector. It is also directed that, if the petitioner or any other member of the Gaon Sabha files an application in the case registered before the Assistant Collector, to be heard in opposition to the notice in the said cases, the Assistant Collector shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the said persons to oppose the defence, if any, taken by the noticee.”

The private respondents have challenged the order dated 13.8.2018, passed by the learned Single Judge in the present Special Appeal.

8. The challenge to the impugned order are mainly on the grounds that the Public Interest Litigation is based upon personal vendetta and, therefore, it is not maintainable and further a compla