Shobhit vs State of U. P. - 2023 Supreme(All) 2717

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(All) 2717

SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Shobhit – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ganesh Pratap Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's illegal encroachment established. (Para 2 , 3)
2. disputes over section 67a application. (Para 4 , 5)
3. importance of land demarcation. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. criteria for protection under section 67a. (Para 10 , 11)
5. consolidation of proceedings for efficiency. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
6. court's failure to consider vital defenses. (Para 16)
7. mistakes necessitate remand for re-evaluation. (Para 17 , 18)
8. directions for new proceedings post-judgment. (Para 19 , 20)

JUDGMENT

Saurabh Srivastava, J.

Heard Shri Ganesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents as well as Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent no.4.

2. The impugned order dated 11.02.2022 passed by the respondent No.3, Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Tehsil- Sadar, District-Ghazipur, rendered in proceedings registered as Computerized Case No. T201814291002148, under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'), finds that the petitioner had illegally encroached over the disputed parcels of land, and accordingly it was directed that the petitioners be evicted