Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 156147 (ALL)

SHAYARA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/7595/2025 · 2025-08-18

Brij Raj Singh, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48132-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7595 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shayara Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Ram Yadav, Monu Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel who appears on behalf of the State-respondent nos.1 to 4 and Shri Dilip Kumar Pandey, who appears on behalf of the Gram Sabha, the Opposite party no.5. 2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following main prayers:- "i) Issue a Writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties, specially opposite party no.3 to decide the Representation dated 15.07.2025 in the interest of justice (Contained as Annexure No.1). ii) Any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper and necessary in the circumstances of the case." 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had purchased Gata No.179, ad-measuring 0.0450 Hectare through a registered sale deed in Village Raisenpur, Tehsil Mehmudabad, District Sitapur on 15.10.2024. Adjacent to the land of the petitioner is Gata No.175 ad-measuring 0.0320 Hectare which is earmarked for manure-pit (Ghoor-Ghaddha). The respondents are alleging that the petitioner has encroached upon such land. The petitioner has filed a case for exchange of his Gata No.179 with the land of Gata No.175 registered as Case No.T202410640610186 in the court of SDM, Mehmudabad which case has been decided against him on 24.03.2025. Now, the Village pradhan is forcibly getting the manure-pit made by interring upon the petitioner's land. 4. Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions has stated that the land of the petitioner's application for exchange of land has been rejected by a detailed and reasoned order on 24.03.2025. It has been found on the basis of on the spot inspection that the land which the petitioner wishes to exchange is not vacant land but his house is constructed thereon. 5. The instructions are kept on record. 6. The writ petition is disposed of leaving it open for the petitioner to either file an Appeal against the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate before the Competent Authority. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 N.PAL Digitally signed by :- NARESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench