# Radha Raman and others v. The District Magistrate, Mathura and others

- **Citation:** (2000) 3 ILRA 114
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2000-01-15
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/radha-raman-and-others-v-the-district-magistrate-mathura-and-others-39468
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000
114
reasons and conclusion. The earlier view
of the Supreme Court was that an order of
affirmance need not give reasons, vide
M.P. Industries Limited. Versus Union of
India, AIR 1966 SC 671 but subsequently
the Supreme Court changed its view and
held that an order of affirmance too must
give reasons, vide Bhagat Raja versus
Union of India, AIR 1967 S.C 1606,
Travancore Rayons versus Union of India,
AIR 1971 SC 862 and C.B. Gautam versus
Union of India, 1993 (1) SCC 78.

4. No doubt the Appellate Authority
need not go into details and give a detailed
judgement like that of a Court of law, but
it must give at least in brief its reasons
showing application of mind. Since that
has not been done, we set aside the
Appellant Authority's order dated 15th
January 2000 and remand the matter to the
Original Authority to pass a fresh order
expeditiously giving reasons and after
hearing the Petitioner in accordance with
law.

5. We make it clear that we are not
setting aside the order of the Original
Authority dated 28th September 1999 but
only of the Appellate Authority. Also we
make it clear that we have allowed the
petition only on one point, and we are not
dealing with the other points raised in this
petition.

Petition allowed.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( 6. -$,1 -
7+( +21·%/( 6. -$,1 -

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW SHWLWLRQ 1R RI

5DGKD 5DPDQ DQG RWKHUV
«3HWLWLRQHUV
9HUVXV
7KH 'LVWULFW 0DJLVWUDWH 'LVWULFW 0DWKXUD
DQG RWKHUV
« 5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
$QLWD 7ULSDWKL
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6&
6KUL %' 0DKGK\DQ

&RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD $UWLFOH 3RZHUV
XQGHU
±
1RW
WR
EH
H[HUFLVHG
ZKHUH
GLVSXWHG TXHVWLRQV RI IDFW DUH LQYROYHG
+HOG 3DUD
7KH UHDO LQWHQWLRQ RI 5HVSRQGHQW QRV WR
 PD\ EH WR LQVWDOO WKH VWDWXH LQ WKH ODGV
RI WKH SHWLWLRQHUV E\ FODLPLQJ LW WR EH
WKHLUV 7KH TXHVWLRQ KRZHYHU QHFHVVDULO\
EHLQJ RI IDFW FDQQRW EH DSSURSULDWHO\
DGMXGLFDWHG
XQGHU
$UWLFOH

RI
WKH
&RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD EXW E\ DQ\ FLYLO
FRXUW XQGHU VHFWLRQ RI WKH FRGH RI FLYLO
SURFHGXUH
RU
EHIRUH
DQ\
RWKHU
DSSURSULDWH
IRUXP
KDYLQJ
VXFK
MXULVGLFWLRQ WR JUDQW LQMXQFWLRQ WKRXJK LW
ZDV
DQG
ZLOO
EH
GXW\
RI
WKH
SROLFH
$GPLQLVWUDWLRQ WR WDNH DSSURSULDWH DFWLRQ
XQGHU WKH SROLFH $FW ,3& DQG &U3&
DQG RI WKH &LYLO $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ XQGHU WKH
&U3& WR SURWHFW FLWL]HQV ZKRVH SURSHUW\
LV
VRXJKW
WR
EH
VTXDQGHUHG
RU
PLVDSSURSULDWHG E\ DQ\ RQH E\ WDNLQJ ODZ
LQ KLV RZQ KDQGV DQGRU E\ UHVRUWLQJ WR
DSSUHKHQVLRQ RI EUHDFK RI WKH SHDFH
3All] Radha Raman and others V. The District Magistrate, Mathura and others
115
By the Court

The petitioners have come up with
two prayers ( I ) to command Respondent
Nos. 4 to 12 not to install the statue of Dr.
B.R. Ambedkar in their chaks (the land
which was allotted to them in the
consolidation proceedings ) and ( ii) to
command Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to take
suitable action in accordance with law
against the afore mentioned Respondents
who forcibly want to install the statue in
their lands.

2. The petitioners assert, interalia,
that plot No. 230 is their bhumidhari of
which no portion was taken out for any
public purpose; on their said plot their
boring is situated, which fact was taken
into
account
by
the
consolidation
authorities while allotting chaks to them;
Respondent Nos. 4 to 12, who are
connected with the local Bahujan Samaj
party, illegally and with a malafide
intention want to install the statue of Dr.
B.R.
Ambedkar
in
their lands; the
petitioners met Respondent No. 3. The
station House Officer, police Station
Vrindavan,
District
Mathura
who,
however,
expressed
his
helplessness
saying that Respondent Nos. 4 to 12
belong to a political party and thereafter
they moved Respondent No. 2 The Senior
Superintendent of Police, District Mathura
and also sent copy of their application filed
before Respondent No. 3 to Respondent
No. 1 The District Magistrate, Mathura
requesting them to restrain Respondent
Nos. 4 to 12 from installing the statue in
question but as despite repeated requests
no action has been taken and hence this
writ petition.

3. No counter has been filed by
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

4. Respondent Nos. 4 to 12 in their
counter affidavit, the original of which,
however, has not been placed by the office
on our record, but a copy thereof having
been shown to us by both sides, assert that
they sought permission from the District
Magistrate for installing the statue of Dr.
B.R. Ambedkar on their own lands bearing
plot No. 260 and thus the petitioners are
not affected in any manner.

5. The petitioners have filed a
Rejoinder denying the stand taken in the
Counter affidavit aforesaid and re-iterated
their allegations.

The Submissions:

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners
contended that the defence taken by
Respondent Nos. 4 to 12 that they are
installing the statue of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
in their own land is incorrect whereas on
the other hand Sri Pramod Kumar Tewari,
learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
Respondent Nos. 4 to 12 contended that
statue in question was not intended to be
installed on any portion of the land which
belongs to the petitioners but on their own
lands.

Our Findings:-

7. No one has got any authority to
erect any statue on some on else's land.
According to the petitioners the statue is
sought to be installed on their lands
whereas Respondent Nos. 4 to 12 are
denying this . The real intention of
Respondent Nos. 4 to 12 may be to install
the statue in the lands of the petitioners by
claiming it to be theirs. The question
however, necessarily being of fact cannot
be appropriately adjudicated under Article
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000
116
226 of the constitution of India but by any
Civil court under section 9 of the code of
Civil procedure or before any other
appropriate forum having such jurisdiction
to grant injunction though it was and will
be duty of the police administration to take
appropriate action under the police Act,
I.P.C. and Cr.P.C. and of the Civil
Administration under the Cr.P.C. to protect
citizens whose property is sought to be
squandered or misappropriated by any one
by taking law in his own hands and/or by
resorting in apprehension of breach of the
peace.

8. Consequently we refuse to grant
relief in relation to prayer No. 1 but in the
larger interest of justice direct the District
Magistrate
and
the
Higher
Police
Authorities of the District Mathura to look
into the matter and stop the mischief if it is
attempted to be done by Respondent Nos.
4 to 12.

9. With these observations and
directions this writ petition is disposed of
but having regard to the peculiar facts and
circumstances we make no order as to cost.

10. The office is directed to hand
over a copy of this order to Smt. Sarita
Singh, learned standing Counsel for its
intimation to the District Authorities of
Mathura for compliance of the directions
made as above.
Petition Disposed of.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( 0 .$7-8 -
7+( +21·%/( 0 .$7-8 -
7+( +21·%/( $ .<2* -
7+( +21·%/( $ .<2* -

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

'&0 6KULUDP ,QGXVWULHV /LPLWHG DQG
RWKHUV
«3HWLWLRQHUV
9HUVXV
6WDWH RI 83 DQG RWKHUV «5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHUV
6KUL 6KDQWL %KXVKDQ
6KUL 7DUXQ $JDUZDO
6KUL 5DNHVK 'ZLYHGL
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6KUL %KDUDW -L $JDUZDO
6KUL 3L\XVK $JDUZDO
6&

83 6HHUD 1L\DQWUDQ $GKLQL\DP
6HFWLRQ 20DUNHW SULFH RI 0RODVVHV
± WR ZKLFK WKH 6XJDU )DFWRU\ LV HQWLWOHG WR
UHFHLYH"2UHWLUHG
+LJK
&RXUW
-XGJH
GHSXWHG WR GHFLGH WKLV TXHVWLRQ ZLWKLQ
WKH SHULRG RI PRQWKV WKH UDWH IL[HG E\
LQWHULP RUGHU LI DQ\ VXUSOXV DPRXQW VKDOO
EH DGMXVWHG E\ HLWKHU RI WKH SDUWLHV DV WKH
FDVH P\
EH2PDUNHW SULFH PHDQV
IUHH
PDUNHW SULFH DQG2QRW WKH SULFH IL[HG E\
WKH FKHPLFDO ,QGXVWU\
+HOG23DUD
,Q RXU RSLQLRQ WKH LPSXJQHG RUGHU LV
DUELWUDU\ DV LW KDV FRQVLGHUHG WKH PDUNHW
SULFH RQO\ IURP WKH SRLQW RI YLHZ RI WKH
FKHPLFDO LQGXVWU\ DQG QRW WKH IUHH PDUNHW
SULFH ,Q RXU RSLQLRQ PDUNHW SULFH PHDQV
WKH IUHH PDUNHW SULFH DV REVHUYHG DERYH
DQG QRW WKH PDUNHW SULFH YLV D YLV WKH
FKHPLFDO LQGXVWU\
&DVH ODZ GLVFXVVHG
:3 1R RI GHFLGHG RQ '%
$,56&2