Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 154599 (ALL)

RAM MAGAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 10 OTHERS

/7289/2025 · 2025-08-05

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45278-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7289 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Magan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondents and Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel representing the Gaon Sabha. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "1. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent Authorities to take immediate preventive measures to restrain Opposite Party No. 11 from making any unauthorized attempt to grab or unlawfully occupy the Petitioner's sahan (open yard space). 2. Issue a writ, Direct the competent officers to ensure that the Petitioner's peaceful and lawful enjoyment of the sahan is protected against any future interference or grab attempts. 3. Order an impartial inquiry into the conduct of Opposite Parties No. 7 to 9, who are allegedly supporting and facilitating such unlawful intentions. 4. Pass any other order(s) deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and protection of the Petitioner's constitutional and usage-based rights over the sahan." 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent no.11 is the real brother of the petitioner and respondent nos.11 to 14 have another house. The respondent no.11 is doing construction upon the Sahan of the petitioner, just in front of the house of the petitioner on land having Gata No.493 Village- Bharthua, Tehsil Kadipur, District Sultanpur, which is recorded as Naveen Parti land. If such construction is allowed to be made, the right of way of the petitioner will be blocked. 4. Learned Counsel for the State Respondent has placed before this Court a copy of instructions sent by the Tehildar Kadipur, wherein a mention has been made of earlier litigation relating to Gata No.493 filed by Chhotelal S/o Rampher praying for cancellation of allotment under Section 66 of the U.P. Revenue Code, namely, Case No.D- 201704680198: Jhagdu Vs. State of U.P. and others, which was dismissed on 16.03.2018. Against the order dated 16.03.2018, Jhagdu filed a Revision before the Additional Commissioner, Ayodhya Mandal, which was also rejected on 23.01.2025. The Area Lekhpal was asked to conduct the spot inspection and it was found that the respondent no.11 Chhotelal S/o Rampher is in possession of land which was duly allotted to him. The petitioner's interest is not being affected in any manner. A copy of the report of the Revenue Inspector, Area Lekhpal and the spot memo prepared on 25.07.2025 is said to be enclosed with the said instructions, however such enclosures have not been sent of the office of the Standing Counsel. 5. Instructions are kept on record. 6. We do not find any good ground to show interference as prayed for. It is for the petitioner to agitate his grievance before the Revenue Court/ Civil Court in case his right of way is being affected. 7. The Writ petition stands dismissed. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Rahul Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench