Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1950 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1002189 of 1998 Petitioner :- Satya Deo Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Petitioner :- Shikha Sinha,Aparna Mehrotra,Shikhar Raj Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shatrughan Chaudhary, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 22.6.1998 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). It is further prayed to issue writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in dispute. 3. While entertaining the writ petition, no interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner. 4. Factual matrix of the case is that a notification was issued for reserving the land for bird sanctuary. The land of the petitioner was also included in the notification. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a case was filed during the consolidation proceeding before the Consolidation Officer, who has passed an order on 25.1.1996 by which an order was passed that the land should be included in his name by making amaldaramad in view of the order passed by the Consolidation Officer. 6. The Gaon Sabha has filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) and as per the statement made in the counter affidavit under paragraph-9, the said appeal is still pending consideration. In paragraph-10 of the counter affidavit it is stated that the disputed land is under the category of land category 6(1) and is a pond and not an agricultural land. 7. In the writ petition, there is no recital in regard to pendency of the appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) nor by means of supplementary affidavit, this fact has been brought into the notice of the Court. It came only on the basis of statement of fact made in the counter affidavit, which has not been denied by filing rejoinder affidavit since the year 1999. Copy of the counter affidavit was served on 21.1.1999. 8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties, I perused the material on record. 9. In view of the facts narrated in paragraphs-9 and 10 of the counter affidavit, the land in dispute is a pond, which right is safeguarded in view of the provision contained under Section 132 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The fact in regard to filing of appeal against the order impugned is not disputed. 10. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievances in the pending appeal. Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Gautam Digitally signed by :- GAUTAM TECKCHANDANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench