Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73734 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39266 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ram Raj Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Case called out in revised list, none appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this petition. 2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record. 3. This writ petition has been filed for following relief:- "i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to take appropriate action upon the application dated to take appropriate action upon the application dated 11.08.2023 pending before him in pursuance of encroachment of Gata no. 482 situated at Village R/o Bhamaura, Chandapur, Post Mukundpur Dist Prayagraj Any other suitable direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit ad proper in the circumstances of the case." 4. From perusal of writ petition and the annexures annexed thereto, it is apparent that the dispute of the petitioner is with one private person, Ghanshyam Singh- respondent No. 4 regarding property in dispute. 5. The Supreme Court in the case of Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil, (2010) 8 SCC 329 has considered a large number of its earlier judgements and held that writ petition is not the proper remedy in respect of the property dispute and the party should be relegated to seek appropriate remedy before the Civil or Revenue Court. Paragraph nos. 64 and 65 of the judgment in Shalini Shyam Shetty (supra) are extracted hereinbelow-: "64. However, this Court unfortunately discerns that of late there is a growing trend amongst several High Courts to entertain writ petition in cases of pure property disputes. Disputes relating to partition suits, matters relating to execution of a decree, in cases of dispute between landlord and tenant and also in a case of money decree and in various other cases where disputed questions of property are involved, writ courts are entertaining such disputes. In some cases the High Courts, in a routine manner, entertain petitions under Article 227 over such disputes and such petitions are treated as writ petitions. 65. We would like to make it clear that in view of the law referred to above in cases of property rights and in disputes between private individuals writ court should not interfere unless there is any infraction of statute or it can be shown that a private individual is acting in collusion with a statutory authority. " 6. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under law. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad