Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44654 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 707 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Gopal Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Prasad Awasthi,Amit Bhardwaj,Kapil Dev Chaubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri R. P. Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Vikram Dutt Pandey holding brief of Sri Pankaj Gupta for opposite party No.s 4 and 5. 2. The petitioner has challenged order dated 6.5.2024 passed by Board of Revenue, Lucknow thereby rejecting the revision holding that the petitioner was not entitled to grant of patta and also found that there is no illegality in cancellation of the same. Further that the petitioner is not entitled to occupy the land which is recorded as pond. 3. The facts in brief are that the petitioner had moved an application before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Mirzapur for being allotted five biswa of land from the banjar land of gata No.450 situated at Village Shivpur Rasoolpur, Pargana Kantit, Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur. It is on this application that the petitioner was allotted five biswa of land vide order dated 10.1.2002. Subsequently, it seems that an application was submitted by the Gaon Sabha that the allotment could not have been made on the gaon sabha land and accordingly vide order dated 23.12.2003 the order for grant of patta was recalled. 4. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 23.12.2003 had filed revision under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act which was rejected by the Board of Revenue by means of order dated 6.5.2024. While rejecting the revison the Board of Revenue has observed that the land of pond which was allotted in favour of another person in light of the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamala Devi and others, reported in 2001 (6) SCC 496 and there was no illegality in the order dated 23.1.2003 regarding grant of patta in favour of the petitioner and, therefor, rejected same. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner assailing the said order has submitted that the land was sought by the petitioner for the purpose of worship but fairly submtis that the allotment could not have been made legally on the ground that it is recorded as pond. 6. Learned Standing counsel, on the other had, has opposed the writ petition and submits that there is no infirmity in the impugned order in as much as the petitioner was granted patta on a land which was recorded as a pond. 7. Considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order dated 6.5.2024 passed by Board of Revenue. We further take into account the fact that the respondents had themselves initially illegally allotted the land of pond in favour of the petitioner which was subsequently cancelled on 23.12.2003, as such, no infirmity can be found in the said order of cancellation in as much as the gaon sabha land in the form of pond cannot be the subject matter of allotment. 8. The petition being devoid of merits is accordingly dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 31.7.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench