Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6859 of 2025 Petitioner :- Parashuram Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue, Deptt., Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Angad Prasad Shukla,Nripendra Pratap Singh,Supriya Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Angad Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for the State-respondents while notice on behalf of respondent No.4- Gram Panchayat has been accepted by Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey. 2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 28.11.2023 passed by Tehsildar (Judicial), Sadar, Lucknow in exercise of the powers under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code wherein he has found that the petitioner has illegally encroached upon gata No.840 Min. area1.2650 hectare out of 0.180 hectare situated in Village Chhota Bharwara, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow has been illegally encroached by the petitioner and four others. 3.The petitioner has duly participated in the said proceedings and also filed his objections to the notice. In this objections he had clearly admitted the fact that he planted certain trees on the said land but has denied his illegal encroachment upon the gaon sabha land. In paragraph 2 he has further admitted that he demarcated the said land by enclosing the same with barbed wires to protect the trees from wild animals. From the admission made in the reply to the notice under Section 67 itself it is abundantly clear that the petitioner has encroached upon the public utility land even if it is for the purpose of plantation of trees and he has encroached the said area by installing barbed wires. It is in aforesaid circumstances that the Tehsildar has found that the petitioner had illegally encroached the said land situated at gata No.840 Mi. and passed appropriate orders for vacation and also imposing penalty and fine upon the petitioner. 4. Against the order dated 28.11.2023 the petitioner had filed an appeal under Section 67 (5) challenging the order before the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Lucknow. In the said appeal he has raised all the objections and denied that he had ever illegally encroached upon public utility land. 5. The appellate authority considering the report of the Lekhpal and also endorsed the finding recorded by the Tehsildar that the petitioner has illegally encroached upon the gaon sabha land situated at khasra No.840 and upheld the order of Tehsildar. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, before this Court, while assailing both the impugned orders dated 28.11.2023 and 1.4.2025 submits that the orders are illegal and arbitrary and deserve interference and also submits that no physical inspection has been carried out by any authority before passing the impugned orders. He further submtis that there is no illegal encroachment by the petitioner on the said land and accordingly prayed for setting aside the impugned orders. 7. Learned Standing counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the writ petition. He submits that as far as the question of illegal encroachment upon the khasra No.840 is concerned there is clear and unequivocal admission by the petitioner himself while filing his objections sunder Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code. In the said reply in paragraph 2 the petitioner himself admitted that he had planted mango, eucalyptus and sagaun trees and to protect the said trees he has enclosed them by barbed wires. Once the aforesaid fact is established and admitted by the petitioner himself no further finding deserved to be recorded in as much as despite receiving the notice under Section 67 the petitioner did not proceed to remove the barbed wires from the said public utility land which has been enclosed by him for his private purpose. 8. Even in the appeal, this Court does not find any assertion of the petitioner that he has removed the encroachment made by him on the gaon sabha land and accordingly in the aforesaid circumstances this Court finds no infirmity in the order of the Tehsildar nor in the appellate order passed by Additional District Magistrate (Judicial). Once the aspect of illegal encroachment has been admitted then it does not lie with the petitioner to dispute the said aspect either before the Tehsildar or before the appellate authority. Any inquiry under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code goes only to the extent of determining the nature of the land on which allegations of illegal encroachment are made which undoubtedly in the present case is a public utility land and if it is found that that any public utility land has been encroached by private individual illegally then appropriate proceedings under Section 67 can be initiated. The petitioner does not deny that gata No.840 Min./1.2650 hectare, which is recorded as Jal Pranali, is a public utility land and while, on the other hand, allegations pertaining to illegal encroachments are admitted by the petitioner himself. 9. Accordingly, in the aforesaid circumstances, no interference is called for in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition is bereft of merits and is accordingly dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 23.7.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench