Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37824 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6336 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Sunder Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Dist. Magistrate Amethi And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikas Yadav,Akash Tiwari,Shivam Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Shri Vikas Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the State- respondents. 2. In light of the proposed order, notice to private respondent no.4 is dispensed with. 3. It has been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a Sankramaniya Bhumidhar of land situated at Gata No.1370/0.0854 hectare situated at Kanaksinghpur, Pargana and Tehsil Amethi, District Amethi. It has further been stated that a suit under Section 30 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2005 was preferred by the petitioner being suit No.885 of 2021, Ram Sundar vs. State of U.P. before the Additional District Magistrate, Finance and Revenue, Amethi, therein final order was passed on 29.11.2021, wherein the application was allowed and the map was accordingly corrected. 4. From the petition, it is also disclosed that consequently proceedings of fixing of stone was also carried out on 08.11.2024 and accordingly, the order dated 29.11.2021 was implemented. It has been submitted that the private respondent has filed an appeal under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2005 against the order dated 29.11.2021 which has also been rejected on 08.11.2024. 5. Despite the aforesaid facts, the allegation is that the private respondent is interfering in the possession of the petitioner and accordingly, by means of the present petition, he has sought a direction to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to give possession of his part of the land in Gata No.1370 in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2021 to the petitioner. 6. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submitted that as far as the order dated 29.11.2021 is concerned, the same pertains only to demarcation and from the material on record, it is clear that the land was duly demarcated by fixing stones and nothing further it was required to be done with regard to giving effect to the order of demarcation. He has submitted that in case the possession of the petitioner is being disturbed, he has adequate remedy under various provisions of the U.P. Revenue Code to move an appropriate application seeking to eject from such holding under Section 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code. In case, such application is made, the authority concerned after hearing the parties, is fully empowered to pass appropriate orders akin to what has been prayed before this Court. 7. Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, has also submitted that he has moved an application to the Sub Divisional Magistrate in this regard but submits that he may be granted liberty to file a fresh application under Section 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code or any other similar provision before the competent authority for the grievance raised in the present petition. 8. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application against the private respondent. In case, the said application is made, the competent authority before whom the same is made, shall pass appropriate orders with expedition in accordance with law. [Alok Mathur,J.] Order Date :- 4.7.2025 KR Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench