HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 6799 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 to 4 and Shri Mohd. Talib Khan holding brief for Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no.6. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to private respondent no.5, is dispensed with. 3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice issued in favour of the petitioner form-20 as provided for the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 dated 04.06.2025 in proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for eviction of the petitioner for the land situated at Gata No. 249, Village Sansarpur (Sansariya), Pargana Patti, Tehsil Raniganj, District Pratapgarh. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the said land a school is running for more than 34 years and the petitioner is managing the affairs of the said school. 5. It has been further submitted that the Gaon Sabha had passed a proposal for allotment of land of Gata No. 249 for running a school and the said school has also got recognized from the Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad. It has been further stated that the Gaon Sabha with the collusion of the Lekhpal had submitted certain complaints stating that the said school was running on the Gaon Sabha land, which is recorded as Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pintoo Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Alguram Patel .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) a pasture land and accordingly proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code was initiated against the petitioner. 6. It has further been submitted that an exparte order dated 2.7.2024 was passed and the petitioner subsequently came to know about the said proceeding and filed an application for restoration on 5.9.2024 and thereafter the order dated 2.7.2024 was recalled and the case was fixed for further hearing. 7. It has further submitted that it is after the aforesaid order restoration has been allowed that the file of the case no. 3173/2022 computer Case No. T20202570503173 (Gaobn Sabha Versus Alguram) was missing from the office of Tehsildar, Tehsil Raniganj, District Pratapgarh. 8. It is stated that at this stage the respondents have issued another notice in form-20 to the petitioner and accordingly he has put under notice for eviction and imposition of the penalty imposed against the petitioner for illegally occupying the Gaon Sabha land, situated at Gata No. 249 M. The petitioner has submitted that once the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code has already been concluded against the petitioner and application for restoration has been allowed then for the petitioner second proceeding cannot be initiated. Accordingly he submits that the issuance of second notice is arbitrary, illegal and deserves to be set aside. 9. Learned Standing Counsel has received written instructions from the Tehsildar, Tehsil Raniganj, District Pratapgarh, from which it has been stated that Gata No. 249 M. area 0.0690 hectares is recorded as a pasture land in the revenue record, on which the petitioner has illegally occupied. It has further been stated that an order for eviction has already been passed but despite the same the petitioner continues in illegal possession. 10. It has been stated that on previous occasion the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code were initiated against the petitioner in Computerized Case No. T202202570503173 and the said file has gone missing from the office, for which purposes a complaint to the police has already been made. It has further been stated that subsequent to the proposal of the land Management Committee dated 05.01.1992 no allotment was made in favour of any person of Gata No. 249 M and WRIC No. 6799 of 2025 2 therefore the petitioner continues in illegal possession of the same. It has further been submitted that entire filing is missing a fresh notice under form 20 has been issued to the petitioner to give his reply and it is only after fresh determination necessary action shall be taken against the petitioner. 11. Learned Standing counsel has fairly submitted that the respondents would not be proceedings against the petitioner in pursuance of the first proceeding as no order is available on record and any action shall be taken against the petitioner shall be taken only after culmination of the proceedings in accordance with law. 12. Learned Standing Counsel has further informed that in pursuance of the notice issued to the petitioner the proceedings have already been concluded by order dated 30.6.2025 and a copy of the same has been produced before this Court. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition and he seeks liberty to assail the validity of the order dated 30.6.2025 before the appropriate court. 14. In the light of above, the present writ petition is dismissed as not pressed, with the aforesaid liberty. September 1, 2025 Muk WRIC No. 6799 of 2025 3 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench