Shiv Pratap Singh v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B.N. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for the respondent- Gaon Sabha.
This Court directed the learned Standing Counsel and learned Counsel for the Gaon Sabha to obtain instruction in the matter.
In compliance of the order of this Court, instruction dated 26.2.2026 sent by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Aliganj, Etah is taken on record.
Learned Standing Counsel for the State on the basis of instruction submitted that village in question is under consolidation operation and notification under Section 10 of U.P.C.H. Act has been issued on
20.2.2022. He further submitted that petitioner and his family member are creating obstruction in the consolidation operation in the village in question.
Since the village in question is under consolidation operation, as such, the instant public interest litigation cannot be entertained.
Learned Standing Counsel is directed to serve the copy of the instruction upon learned counsel for the petitioner during course of the day.
Learned counsel for the petitioner shall address the Court as to how the public interest litigation can be entertained during consolidation operation 2 WPIL No. 3639 of 2025 in the village in question and why the fact regarding consolidation operation in the village in question has not been disclosed in the instant public interest litigation.
Put up this case as fresh on 25.3.2026. March 11, 2026 Rameez (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.