Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48189-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5740 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sheshnath Mishra @ Shesnath Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashutosh Dhar Dubey,Mohan Singh,Roshani Pandey Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Shri Mahesh Mishra learned Standing Counsel. In pursuance of our order passed earlier, Shri Sudhir Kumar, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Milkipur, District Ayodhya and Shri Anand Rai, Naib Tehsildar, Amaniganj,District Ayodhya are present in person before this Court. Shri Praveen Yadav, Additional Collector, District Ayodhya is also present through Video Conferencing provided to him by the Registry of this Court. We have also noticed that there is a typographical error in the order dated 11.8.2025. Instead of 18.8.2025, an incorrect date of 18.9.2025 has been mentioned. Accordingly, the date fixed in the matter shall be treated as 18.8.2025, as orally mentioned in the court and recorded in the computer system. It appears that the petitioner has filed this writ petition on 2.6.2025 alleging that the revenue authorities had taken over the possession of land of Gata No.833/0.1790 hectare minjumla, situated in Village Ichchoin, (Dharauli), Post Amaniganj, Tehsil Milkipur, District Faizabad (Ayodhya) forcibly from the petitioner and the revenue authorities should be directed to restore the possession of the petitioner by erecting the wall that they had illegally demolished on 27.5.2025 and also to give him compensation for the loss incurred to him.passage. Further a writ of mandamus was sought commanding the respondents not to establish the road over Gata No.833 which belongs to the petitioner or over Gata No.832 recorded as Naveen Parti [category5(1)] in the revenue records. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Gata No.832/0.0580 hectare which is recorded as naveen parti land belongs to Gram Sabha. Gata No.833/0.1790 hectares minjumla belongs to the petitioner. The pattidar/family members of the petitioner had lodged a complaint with regard to unathorised encroachment on Gata No.833 by the petitioner. They had prayed for partition/demarcation of Gata No.833. It is not disputed that the petitioner and his pattidars/ family members are having possession over Gata No.833/0.1790 hectares on their share settled by them through a family settlement. The S.D.M., Milkipur submitted a report before the District Magistrate on 6.1.2024 mentioning that since in Gata No.833, houses were set up and for this reason, the partition could not be done and Kurrafat could not prepared. All of a sudden, on 27.5.2025, the Naib Tehsildar alongwith area Lekhpal and revenue inspector visited the spot i.e. Gata No.832 which is recorded as Gram Sabha Naveen Parti land and without any demarcation, the petitioner house has been demolished which was situated in Gata No.833 which belongs to the petitioner. The Naib Tehsildar also directed construction of Kharanja over naveen parti land as well as demolition of petitioner's wall at the behest of private parties. After demarcation of petitioner's land, a kharanja was also constructed not only over the land of Gata No.832 but also the land of petitioner i.e. Gata No.833. The petitioner made a complaint to the Principal Secretary, Revenue regarding illegal construction of Kharanja over petitioner's land. No heed was paid as such this writ petition was filed. This Court on 5.6.2025 while being apprised of such facts as pleaded in the writ petition directed the Collector, Ayodhya to get an inquiry conducted into the matter by an officer who is not posted in the Tehsil where the incident had taken place and to submit his report in the sealed cover by the next date of listing. The opposite parties nos.2 and 3 i.e. S.D.M., Milkipur and Tehsildar, Amaniganj were also directed to appear on the next date. When the matter was taken up on 17.7.2025, the officers were present as directed by the court. The inquiry report was submitted in a sealed cover. The court had gone through the inquiry report and found that the revenue team removed all encroachment but did not explain the presence of the revenue team at the spot and the affidavit that was submitted by the S.D.M. stated that removal of encroachment had taken place but without notice to the alleged encroachers which was necessary under the law. The Court directed a supplementary report to be submitted and the officers who had joined the proceedings were also directed to appear again. The Additional Collector/ inquiry officer was directed to state in his report as to what exactly happened on 27.5.2025 and also explain the presence of the officers on the spot as was evident from the photographs that have been annexed alongwith the writ petition. The matter was taken up again on 31.7.2025. The respondents were granted time to respond to the two reports i.e. the inquiry report and supplementary inquiry report submitted by the respondents and the inquiry officer was also directed to join the proceedings through Video Conferencing and the rest of the officials were directed to remain present before the Court on the next date of listing. Today, when the matter has been taken up, Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel has pointed out the affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3, copy of which has been served upon the petitioner. In the said affidavit, it has been stated that in compliance of the earlier orders passed by the Court, an inquiry was conducted. In the inquiry report, it was found that no demolition whatsoever has been done over construction of Gata No.833 which belongs to the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner has set up a temporary kaccha wall and also set up a chappar over Gata No.832. Such temporary structures and chappar have been removed. Portion of Gata No.832 recorded as Naveen Parti was being used by the villagers residing in the vicinity since long as a public rasta. The persons residing in the vicinity had paved such rasta with kharanja. No permission regarding the same was granted by any revenue authority. It has been submitted that the area Lekhpal, Revenue Inspector and Niab Tehsildar were present at the time of removal of encroachment on 27.5.2025 as it was Naveen Parti /Gram Sabha land which was encroached upon by the petitioner. Initially, a demarcation has been carried out on 19.4.2025 of Gaon Sabha land and the petitioner had been orally instructed to remove encroachment made by him but he failed to do so. Therefore, on complaint being made by the local people, the revenue team visited the site on 27.5.2025 and removed the encroachment. Such removal of encroachment was done on the oral order of the S.D.M., Milkipur. When the revenue team asked the village pradhan to provide labourers for removing the bricks and other structures from Gaon Sabha's land, no labourer was provided by the Gram Pradhan. Also the bricks and other structures were removed with the help of some villagers who came forward to help the revenue team. Since this Court had expressed its displeasure in its order dated 17.7.2025 regarding the revenue team not observing the procedure prescribed in law in removing the temporary encroachment on 27.5.2025, a show cause notice has been issued to the officers concerned. It has also been stated that the kaccha rasta was already in existence over Gata No.832. Only kharanja has now been laid over there for the benefit of the local residents. We have gone through the inquiry report as well as the supplementary inquiry report. Both these inquiry reports state that the petitioner has encroached upon the Gaon Sabha's land i.e. Gata No.832 by raising temporary structures/keeping bricks and chappars over it. The inquiry report also says that the demarcation was carried out on 19.4.2025 and the petitioner was asked to remove such encroachment but the petitioner failed to remove such encroachment even after giving an assurance in this regard. When the complaint was received, the revenue team went on the spot to remove and thereafter removed the encroachment over Gata No.832, however no prior notice was issued to the petitioner before removal of the temporary structures. No proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code was undertaken. During these inquiries, which were conducted on the spot, the petitioner was given notices twice and dates were fixed for him to appear and contest his case before the authority concerned/ inquiry officer, he refused to appear. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage, states that there is an admission on the part of the respondents of removal of construction raised by the petitioner over Gata No.832 without notice to him and without initiating proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code. The petitioner also objected to laying of kharanja over part of naveen parti land belonging to Gaon Sabha. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that since 19.4.2025 the petitioner was aware of the fact that his temporary structures was not over his land i.e. Gata No.833 but over Gaon Sabha's land Gata No.832 recorded as naveen parti. He persisted in such illegal encroachment even after he came to know about the demarcation of land on 19.4.2025. The only irregularity we find in the action of the revenue team is of visiting the site on 27.5.2025 and removing the temporary construction/encroachment without prior notice to the petitioner. Since the action has been taken only to protect the Gaon Sabha's land reserved for public rasta and not to protect any private party interest, we cannot direct the reconstruction of the petitioner's illegal wall and re-establishment of his chappar over naveen parti land. Since show cause notice has already been issued to the officers responsible for removal of petitioner's encroachment without prior notice, we feel it appropriate to direct the authorities concerned to take an appropriate decision as expeditiously as possible, say within a period of six weeks. Insofar as the petitioner's prayer as made in the relief clause are concerned, since no wall over Gata No.833 has been demolished, there is no question of directing the respondents to reconstruct such walls. No road has been established over Gata No.833, therefore, no direction can be issued to remove such road/ kharanja. Insofar as the prayer clause no.3 is concerned regarding a direction to the respondents not to establish road over Gata No.832 recorded as Naveen parti belonging to Gaon Sabha, we do not feel it necessary to issue such orders as the kharanaja has been laid over Gaon Sabha's land which is public land and khanraja is being used for public purposes. Since the petitioner has apprehension that private respondents are also encroaching over public land i.e. Gata No.832, it is always open to the petitioner to move an application under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code for removal of such constructions. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Shukla Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench