Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32466 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41865 of 2024 Petitioner :- Chandrawati Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for respondent- Gram Sabha and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful possession and instructional part of Gata No. 275 total area 0.332 hectare situated in Village Kaulahi Pargana Vinayakpur Tehsil Nautanwa District Maharajganj." 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that order for ejectment and damages under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been passed by Tehsildar in arbitrary and ex-parte manner. He further submitted that civil suit filed by petitioner's husband for injunction was decreed in the year 1996, as such, the proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 cannot be initiated. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and counsel for the Gaon Sabha submitted that the writ for mandamus cannot be entertained as order for ejectment and damages has been passed by Tehsildar against the petitioner in the year 2019. They further submitted that in civil suit filed by petitioner's husband, State and Gaon Sabha were not parties, as such, the same cannot be relied upon. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. There is no dispute about the fact that order for ejectment and damages has been passed against the petitioner in the proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case specially the order passed by Tehsildar under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against the petitioner, the instant petition for mandamus cannot be entertained. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioner to challenge the order passed by Tehsildar under Section 67of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in appropriate proceeding. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Vandana Y. Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad