SONI @ SOHANPAL @ SOHAN KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/34235/2025 · 2025-09-24
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 100483 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 100483 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34235 of 2025 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. Petitioner, before this Court, claims that his father Harish Chandra had purchased land measuring 748 Square Yards of Gata No.215-M i.e. 0.0620 hectares in the year 1983 through a registered sale deed. After purchasing the land, house was constructed over it. Eviction proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner on the ground that he has encroached upon the land of Gaon Sabha which has been recorded as pond which is Gata No.216 to the extent of 0.0050 hectares. 2. Eviction order was passed which was challenged in appeal wherein a specific ground has been taken being ground no.4 and 7. The appellate authority has recorded finding that the petitioner has encroached upon 50 Sq.M. of land of the pond being Gata No.216. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite remand order passed by the writ Court, the authorities have not demarcated the land and are proceeding to demolish the house of the petitioner which is standing over Arazi No.215-M.
4. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition and defended the order passed by the authorities. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, I find that the revenue authorities have not touched upon the house of the petitioner standing over Arazi No.215-M. The finding has been recorded by both the authorities that the encroachment is of 50 Sq.M. of the land of Gaon Sabha recorded as pond i.e. Gata No.216. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Baij Nath Pal, Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sunil Kumar Singh Soni @ Sohanpal @ Sohan Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
6. This Court finds that as no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, or calling for counter affidavit, writ petition is being disposed of requiring the revenue authorities to demarcate the house of the petitioner which is standing on Gata No.215-M, measuring 748 Sq.Yards which was purchased by father of the petitioner, Harish Chandra way back in the year 1983 and thereafter demarcate the land of the pond which is Gata No.216. 7. In case, any encroachment is found over Gata No.216, the same shall be demolished and the damages shall be recovered from the petitioner.
However, in case, no encroachment is found and it is found that house of the petitioner exists on Gata No.215-M, no demolition activity shall be carried out, nor any damages shall be recovered. 8. The demarcation activity shall be carried out in presence of the petitioner, within 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 9. With the aforesaid observations, writ petition stands disposed of. September 25, 2025 SK Goswami WRIC No. 34235 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad