IMAMUDDIN AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE LKO. AND 11 OTHERS
WPIL/267/2025 · 2025-03-24
Ajai Kumar Srivastava I, Attau Rahman Masoodi
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 128929 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 128929 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16627-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 267 of 2025 Petitioner :- Imamuddin And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Adnan Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sabir Ali Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
1. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Rohit Tripathi, learned counsel on behalf of the opposite party no.12, is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Adnan Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mohd. Arif Khan, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Sabir Ali, learned counsel for opposite parties no.5 to 11 as well as Ms. Isha Mittal, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
3. The writ petition filed in public interest relates to an immovable property of which the old gata number as per the revenue record is mentioned as 309/2, corresponding to gata no.509, presently mentioned in the revenue records.
4. It appears that the proceedings under Section 38 (2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were previously taken up before the S.D.O. at the instance of a report submitted by the Tahsildar and an order was passed on 23.11.2020, whereby the revenue record was corrected by recording the said land as Graveyard (Qabristan).
5. The order passed by the S.D.O in the proceedings as aforesaid i.e. case no.04438 of 2020, in re: Sarkar Vs. Qamar Hussnain, gave rise to a writ petition filed before this Court i.e. Misc. Single No. 24789 of 2020 wherein an interlocutory
order of status-quo was granted. The said writ petition was instituted by opposite party no.12 herein. Later on the aforementioned writ petition came to be dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 03.03.2022. Thereafter one more petition i.e.
W.P.No.17316 of 2020 was filed by opposite party no.5 but the same was also declined to be entertained on the ground that the petitioner (opposite party no.5) had a statutory remedy of revision before the Board of Revenue as well as Civil Court. 6. It is in this backdrop that two proceedings are presently pending before the Revenue Court and Civil Court. 7. The proceeding before the S.D.M. is pending on the basis of a remand order dated 21.8.2024 passed by the Board of Revenue wherein the correction of revenue record is the subject matter and parties are free to participate therein. 8. Insofar as the Regular Suit No.139/2020 is concerned, the same has been instituted by opposite party no.5 wherein notices have been issued to the defendants. 9. The dispute appears to be between the villagers. One set of litigants is claiming the land in question to be an ancestral property whereas, the other set of local residents is claiming it to be the qabristan (graveyard). 10. The revenue records also make a mention of the mosque, graves and the ownership rights. 11. The matter is to be decided having regard to the evidence which may be led before the competent forum where the proceedings are pending. 12. We gather from the order dated 11.11.2020 passed in Regular Suit No.139 of 2020 that defendants no.1 to 10 have been directed not to interfere with the possessory rights and any construction upon the disputed land has been forbidden. 13. At this stage, we find that the proceedings before the revenue court as well as the civil court are pending both for the correction of revenue record as well as for grant of permanent
injunction. 14. In these circumstances we leave it open to the petitioners to participate in the pending proceedings. We also clarify that the order passed by the Civil Court in the injunction suit be obeyed by the respective parties. In the event of a situation threatening tranquility, it shall be open to the district authorities to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
We however leave the proceedings to be decided on its own merit by the revenue court and civil court both. 15. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. ) (Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.)
Order Date :- 24.3.2025 Shahnaz Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench