VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Allahabad High Court 2023 › High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Natthu Lal and 12 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dismissed on merits
Court
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Decided
16 November 2023
Case no.
WRIC 39475/2023

Judgment

Court No. - 51 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39475 of 2023 Petitioner :- Natthu Lal And 12 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Rajpoot,Sher Bahadur Singh Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sher Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha and Sri Sanjay Rajpoot, learned counsel for the caveator-respondents.

¶2The instant writ petition has been filed for mandamus, directing respondent no.3/Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil, Bisalpur,

District

Pilibhit

to

decide

the application/representation dated 22.9.2023, within the stipulated period.

¶3Counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners were granted lease for 5 years. He submitted that sugarcane crops are standing over the plot in dispute. He also submitted

that

petitioners

have

filed

an application/representation dated 22.9.2023 with the prayer that period of lease be extended in favour of the petitioners.

¶4Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state-respondents submitted that lease cannot be extended as prayed

by

the

petitioners

under

his application/representation dated 22.9.2023, as such, the application/representation of the petitioners is misconceived and cannot be entertained.

¶5I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.

¶6The application/representation dated 22.9.2023 filed by the petitioners before respondent no.3 reveals that petitioners prays for renewal of lease, alleged to be executed in favour of the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners has failed to demonstrate as to under what provisions of law, the lease can be renewed in favour of the petitioners.

¶7No interference is required in respect to the relief claimed in the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶8The writ petition is not maintainable and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 C.Prakash High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Source: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.