Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3435-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 178 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sipahi Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Singh,Ayush Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard. The father of the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition bearing No. 6214 (M/B) of 2002. The said writ petition was disposed of on 17.05.2016 in the following terms:- "Heard Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel. The petitioner has prayed for issuing a mandamus to the opposite parties not to disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioners from the plot which has been held by them on the basis of the old record survey operation. This Court by means of order dated 10 October 2002 had passed the following interim order. "Notice on behalf of opposite parties has been accepted by the learned Standing Counsel who prays for and is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. In the meantime, if re-survey is still continuing in pursuance of the Notification dated 02.03.1995 or any other fresh Notification the opposite parties shall not disturb the possession of the petitioners over their land but the petitioners shall also allow the authorities to make re-survey and if necessary permit them to put the marks/identification marks on their plots also. This interim order shall continue till re-survey is completed or till further orders of the Court which ever is earlier." The respondents have come forward to file counter affidavit, in paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit they have submitted that "it is wrong that the opposite parties have ever done anything to dispossess the petitioners from their holdings. The opposite parties are complying the said interim orders passed in the above noted writ petition in the eye of law and remaining allegations of the paras under reply are misleading and wrong and same are denied." Since the respondents have denied from dispossession of the petitioners, we are of the view that the petitioners grievance of their dispossession to be done by the respondents are over. In the result the writ petition is disposed of finally in the aforesaid terms. The copy of the counter affidavit supplied by the respondent is taken on record." Now, the son has come to the Court again claiming dispossession. We asked the learned Counsel for the petitioner as to what is the cause of action for filing this writ petition, especially as, no order has been passed by the Record Operations Officer, which could be the basis for filing this petition. He invited our attention to Paragraph 25. Paragraph 25 refers to the earlier judgment dated 17.05.2016. This could hardly give a cause of action in 2025. If there is any violation of the judgment passed in the writ petition filed by the father, appropriate remedies can be adopted by the petitioner, if he has locus. Moreover, learned Standing Counsel says that Assistant Record Officer has given written instructions that no proceedings for dispossession have been drawn nor is it proposed. Record operations are being undertaken as per the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and U.P. Land Revenue (Survey and Record Operations) Rules, 1978. The written instructions are taken on record. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere in the matter but without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the petitioner, in the proceedings for correction of record operations. If the operations are not completed within a reasonable time, say within six months, or reasons are not given to the petitioner, then he may approach this Court again. As far as, relief number 3 is concerned, the petitioner may raise it separately before the concerned opposite party i.e. the District Magistrate or the Assistant Record Officer, who shall do the needful, as per law. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Lokesh Kumar [Manish Kumar, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.] Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench