Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 142769 (ALL)

SHIV RAM TIWARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE LKO. AND 7 OTHERS

WRIC/5276/2025 · 2025-06-03

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34323-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5276 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shiv Ram Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Shankar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J. Heard. Instructions of the learned Standing Counsel as received from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jamua, District - Shravasti are that exercise for demarcation was undertaken firstly on the application of the opposite party no. 8, thereafter, on the application of the petitioner, and, it was found that the petitioner's house has been constructed by encroaching part of Gata No. 1931, which is recorded as 'Sadak'. The petitioner is recorded only in respect of Gata No. 1930, which is not being touched by the authorities. However, on being asked as to whether the demarcation exercise was conducted in terms of Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and the corresponding Rules of 2016, the instructions are silent on this point. Further, there are proceedings prescribed for removal of encroachment under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and the corresponding Rules of 2016. As of now, there is nothing before us to indicate that any such proceedings have been drawn. At this stage, it is informed that the notice on 27.01.2025 for demolition has been given by the authorities of the Public Works Department who have constructed the road. It is not clear as to under which provision the said notice has been given by the Public Works Department. Nevertheless, without going into the said questions if the P.W.D. is to remove the encroachment, first of all proceedings under Section 24 will have to take place. On conclusion of the proceedings if it is found that the petitioner has exceeded the boundaries of his Gata and has encroached on any public land, such as the raasta, as is claimed, then of course, he would be given reasonable time to remove the encroachment on his own, failing which, it shall be open for the concerned authorities to give notice and remove the said encroachment. It would be without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the petitioner to challenge the said demarcation. We dispose of this petition with the aforesaid observations / directions. Order Date :- 3.6.2025 Lokesh Kumar [Praveen Kumar Giri, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.] Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench