Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43810 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6827 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jamal Waris Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Kumar Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Shri Pramendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of State respondents no.1 to 3 and Ms. Palvi Singh, holding brief of Shri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Nagar Panchayat. 2. The petitioner has aggrieved by the proceedings conducted under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code wherein it has been held that the petitioner has illegally encroached upon Gata No.928/0.154 hectare and in the said Gata 0.030 hectare has been illegally encroached by the petitioner and constructed a shop along over the said land. 3. Per contra, it has been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had purchased land in Gata No.516 min area 16 X 30 feet from Safikunnisha, who was the recorded tenure holder on 09.05.1980 by a registered sale deed and has constructed a shop over the said land. It has been stated that it is the report of the Lekhpal that the present proceedings were initiated. It has further been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that he has moved an application under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code before the Collector, Barabanki, which is pending consideration. He submits that as per his application under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, Gata Nos.928 and 516 have been merged creating a new Gata No.516. It has been submitted that the said proceedings are pending since 2019 and during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the order passed under Section 67 and 67(5) of the U.P Revenue Code should not be implemented inasmuch as the right of the petitioner is still under adjudication before District Magistrate, Barabanki. 4. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, opposed the writ petition but does not dispute the aforesaid facts. 5. Considering the case of the petitioner, it is noticed that an application for correction of Map under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code is pending before the District Magistrate, Barabanki in Case No.D201904120002697 since 2019. From the contention of the petitioner, it is evident that two gatas, namely, 516 and 928 have been merged together in Gata No.516 and in case, the contention of the petitioner is accepted, then Gata No.516 would have an independent existence along with Gata No.928 and may impact the findings recorded in proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code. 6. Accordingly, District Magistrate, Barabanki is directed to consider and decide the application of the petitioner under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, expeditiously, say within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of the order is produced before him or six weeks from the date this order is communicated through the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. 7. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the proceedings before the District Magistrate concerned. It is further provided that in case, the application of the petitioner is allowed and his contention is accepted, he will be at liberty to move an application for recall of the order passed under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code and on receipt of the said application, the appellate authority shall duly consider and pass fresh order considering the order passed under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code. In case, the application of the petitioner under Section 30(1) is rejected, then the respondents will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law and ensure compliance of the order under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, subject to any another legal remedy, the petitioner may choose to avail. 8. It is the during the pendency of application under Section 30(1), no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner and it is made clear that once the application under Section 30(1) is decided, the interim order shall seize to operate and the directions given above shall be complied. 9. This order shall continue to have effect two weeks after the date of decision under Section 30(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code. 10. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of. [Alok Mathur,J.] Order Date :- 29.7.2025 KR Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench