UP. A person who comes to demand justice with tainted hands has no right to get relief. Allahabad High Court has said this. The court said that the person filing the petition by hiding the facts is actually cheating the court. Along with this, the court has termed the PIL filed by the petitioner, embroiled in a personal dispute, demanding eviction of the opposition from the enemy property pending in the court as an abuse of judicial process and has dismissed the petition while imposing a compensation of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner.
This order has been given by the division bench of Justice MK Gupta and Justice Kshitij Shailendra on the PIL of Akbar Abbas Zaidi, resident of Kalan village in Kairana tehsil of Shamli. The court has directed to deposit the compensation amount in the bank account of Rabindra Nath Gaur Anand Old Age Home of Tara Sansthan located in LIC Colony, Tagore Town locality of Prayagraj. The court has ordered the petitioner to deposit this compensation before the Director General within three weeks. Also said that if the compensation is not deposited, the District Magistrate Shamli should collect the revenue and deposit it within a month.
The petitioner said that he is a social worker. Plot number 24 of the village has been declared enemy property. In the petition, a demand was made to remove the illegal construction of three land mafia (opponents) from this plot. The opposition parties filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner and they were partners in a firm and the alleged enemy property belonged to them. The Assistant Collector had rejected his ownership claim. Additional Commissioner, Meerut, while accepting the appeal, accepted his right on 1/5th part of the land. The second appeal filed in the Board of Revenue was remanded, which has been challenged in the High Court. This appeal is pending. Shops have been built on the land. There was a firm partnership between the petitioner and the opposition, regarding which this PIL has been filed by misusing the judicial process.
High Court imposed a fine of Rs 50 thousand on the petitioner itself
