.png)
Grievance Status for registration number : GOVUP/E/2022/23360
Grievance Concerns To
Name Of Complainant
Yogi M. P. Singh
Date of Receipt
24/04/2022
Received By Ministry/Department
Uttar Pradesh
Grievance Description
An application under Article 51 A of the constitution of India on behalf of Sachchida Nand Shukla whose address is as follows.
The matter concerns representation submitted under section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, U.P. Act No. 8 of 2012 by Sachchida Nand Shukla and no action taken by the sub divisional magistrate Sadar because of anarchy in government.
मामला उत्तर प्रदेश की धारा 24 राजस्व संहिता, 2006, उ.प्र. 2012 के अधिनियम संख्या 8 के तहत सच्चिदा नंद शुक्ला द्वारा प्रस्तुत किए गए अभ्यावेदन से संबंधित है और सरकार में अराजकता के कारण उप मंडल मजिस्ट्रेट सदर द्वारा कोई कार्रवाई नहीं की गई।
आवेदक का नाम-Anjaney Shuklaविषय-An application under section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, U.P. Act No. 8 of 2012 Last Updated 30th March 2021 To Hon’ble Sub divisional Magistrate Sadar District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh Prayer-Please direct concerned staff of the Tahsil Sadar to settle Dispute regarding boundaries of Araji number- 326 ख. as encroachers want to grab the land. Detail of the land as aforementioned is attached herewith as annexure 1 to this application. Applicant cum complainant- Sachchida Nand Shukla Name of the father- Mr. Krishna Nand Shukla Village- Naugaon , Post- Nadini District- Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh PIN Code-231303, Mobile number-7860688249 for more feedback, vide attached documents to the grievance. Aforementioned matter was sent to the Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar district Mirzapur on 10092021 . It is most unfortunate that the sub divisional Magistrate is adopting a lackadaisical approach in the matter. Because of procrastination of the concerned staff no action has been taken in the matter still. Such approach on the part of staff of tehsil Sadar showing insolence. Please take appropriate action in under intimation to the aggrieved.
The matter concerns the grabbing of the land by the Executive Engineer JAL Nigam arbitrarily without adopting due procedure of law by acting in caucus with the other accountable public staffs at the district level which is unconstitutional and arbitrary action by the district administration showing lawlessness and anarchy in the state. The application of the aggrieved addressed to the District Magistrate Mirzapur is attached to this grievance and document concerned with the title of the land is also attached to the grievance. Please restrain executive engineer JAL Nigam from grabbing the land of the applicant illegally even when the applicant kept his point before the staff concerned. In India, right to property was initially considered as a fundamental right, but later it was scrapped down and became merely a constitutional right by the 44th amendment of the constitution, under the provision of Article 300A. The state has powers to acquire any private land for the public purpose or its own purpose, but this is only possible after giving adequate compensation to the private individual/ party. Here this question arises that why private land of the applicant is being acquired cum grabbed by the Executive Engineer JAL Nigam arbitrarily without adopting due procedure as prescribed under the law of India. In 1967, the Himachal Pradesh government forcibly took four acres of land from a widow, Vidya Devi, to build a road The court delivered the decision in favour of Ms Devi by stating-‘A citizen’s right to own private property is a human right. The state cannot take possession of it without following due procedure and authority of law the state cannot trespass into the private property of a citizen and then claim ownership of the land in the name of ‘adverse possession’. Grabbing private land and then claiming it as its own makes the state an encroacher Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) also recognizes the right to private property, and India is a signatory to that declaration. One thing is to be noted that the framers of our constitution paid sufficient focus to the right to property as they drafted article 19(1) (f) and Article 31 in the constitution.
Grievance Document
Current Status
Case closed
Date of Action
30/04/2022
Remarks
अधीनस्थ अधिकारी के स्तर पर निस्तारित Ut ke sambndh me awagat karana hai ki nougaw peyjal yojana ke shiropari jalashay ds nirman kary hetu gram panchayat dwara gata sankhya 326k prastawit kiya gaya tha jis par kary ke douran vivad utpann hone par pun 21.04.2022 ko lekhapal and kanoonago dwara pun simankan kar najari naksha raiyar kiya gaya prathi dwara mukhyat gata sankhya 326 kh ke seema nirdharan hetu anurodh kiya gaya hai ukt prakaran tehsin star se sambndhit hai
Reply Document
Rating
1
Poor
Rating Remarks
How the grievance can be considered disposed of when the executive Engineer of the water corporation /Jal Nigam itself accepted that applicant has made request to decide the boundary of the Araji number 326 kh which is quite obvious from the report of the excutive engineer water corporation /Jal Nigam. Undoubtedly, executive engineer water corporation Jal Nigam is saying that both Lekhpal and the revenue inspector decided the boundary of the araji number 326k but the factual position is that they have taken the land of the araji number 326 kh in the name of araji number 326 k. Here government functionaries itself acted like land grabber of the land by misusing the government machinery which reflects the anarchy in the government as the transitory land of the Sachidanand Shukla son of Krishnanand Shukla was grabbed by the government by misusing government machinery. Factual position is because of corruption our government machinery has been incentive to grievances of common people.
Officer Concerns To
Officer Name
Shri Bhaskar Pandey (Joint Secretary)
Organisation name
Government of Uttar Pradesh
Contact Address
Chief Minister Secretariat , Room No. 321, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow
Email Address
bhaskar.12214@gov.in
Contact Number
05222226350
Tags:
Section 24
How the grievance can be considered disposed of when the executive Engineer of the water corporation /Jal Nigam itself accepted that applicant has made request to decide the boundary of the Araji number 326 kh which is quite obvious from the report of the excutive engineer water corporation /Jal Nigam. Undoubtedly, executive engineer water corporation Jal Nigam is saying that both Lekhpal and the revenue inspector decided the boundary of the araji number 326k but the factual position is that they have taken the land of the araji number 326 kh in the name of araji number 326 k.
ReplyDelete