Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19311-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2120 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Suryakala And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Pratap Singh,Indrajeet Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anoop Kumar Upadhyay,Indrajeet Shukla,Sandeep Kumar Pandey,Satish Chandra Kashish,Shitla Prasad Tiwari Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. Heard. Sri Sandeep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.9 and 10 has filed a counter affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record. After hearing the parties including the District Magistrate, Gonda, what comes out is that there is a dispute between the petitioners and opposite party No.9 in respect of the plot in question and at the relevant time when the District Magistrate, Gonda has passed the order dated 03.02.2025 directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned to take action as per rules for removal of encroachment and pollution, some proceedings were pending before the Consolidation Officer for recall of an order passed by him under Section 42 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 at the behest of the opposite party No.9 but according to the petitioners on account of the order passed by the District Magistrate, Gonda, serious prejudice was caused to the petitioners as, temporary structures, as claimed by the petitioners, were removed and the opposite party No.9 was able to undertake some constructions. We do not express any opinion at this stage on these allegations, suffice is to say that this was not a matter where the District Magistrate, Gonda could have passed a cryptic order on the administrative side, merely on an application by the opposite party No.9 as essentially there appears to a dispute regarding title or possession or area of the plot. Even if there was any pollution involved, the matter should have been taken cognizance by the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board or any other authorities, who may have statutory jurisdiction in this regard. Land bearing Gata No.422Ga was a 'chak out' land as informed by the Consolidation Officer, who is present, as there were houses etc., built thereon. He also informs that application for recall filed by the petitioners has been decided on 29.03.2025. We do not say that the petitioners may have had any right in respect of the land but certainly they were claiming such right. At this stage, it is informed that the petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. For the reasons aforesaid as we find that the order of the District Magistrate, Gonda was apparently without jurisdiction, for which, there were no basis in any statute or law, we quash the same. We further provide that the Deputy Director of Consolidation shall now consider the proceedings initiated by the petitioners, if maintainable, as per law, and conclude it at the earliest without being influenced from any quarter whatsoever i.e. independently and objectively. If the petitioners have any cause to initiate any other proceedings for possession etc., it shall be open for them to do so uninfluenced by the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Gonda. We have not adjudicated the rights of the rival parties but have only adjudicated the validity of the administrative order passed by the District Magistrate, Gonda on the application of opposite party No.9. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench