Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47282 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7680 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Shakina Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 46 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Pheran Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Awadhesh Kumar Singh,Govind Kumar Chourasia,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Pheran Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 5. Sri Govind Kumar Chourasia, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent nos. 7. 8, 9, 17, 18, 29, 43, 44, 16, 19 and 22. Sri Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of caveator. Sri Vishal Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pankaj Gupta, has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 47. 2. The dispute raised by the petitioner in the present case pertains to allotment of Patta in favour of respondent nos. 6 to 44. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that housing Patta was allotted in favour of respondent nos. 4 to 44 on 03.03.2018 over Gata No. 66, situated in Village - Moharniya, Pargana - Bahraich, Tehsil - Jamunaha, District - Shravasti. It has been further submitted that adjacent to the aforesaid land a highway has been constructed making the said land very valuable. Apart from which the petitioner claims to be the recorded tenure holder of Gata No. 62, area 0.008 hectares which has been purchased by the petitioner through registered sale deed on 29.01.2015. 4. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the private respondents are encroaching upon the land of the petitioner. He has further submitted that the respondents have also constructed boundary wall on her land and it is in the light of the aforesaid facts that the petitioner had challenged allotment of Pattas made in favour of the private respondents. 5. The objections filed by the petitioner were duly considered under the provisions of Section 122-C(6) of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 by the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Devi Patan Division, District - Shravasti. In the aforesaid proceedings the allottees (private respondents) have put in appearance and filed their objections to the application preferred by the petitioner. One of the main contention of the private respondents was that the petitioner is not an aggrieved person pertaining to allotment of Patta in their favour. The Additional District Magistrate by means of order dated 12.11.2020, also concurred with the preliminary objection raised by the private respondents and held that subsequent to alloment of Pattas possession has been given to all the allottees, some of whom have also raised permanent structure. Apart from which the Additional District Magistrate has found that petitioner is not a person aggrieved. He while deciding the said fact returned finding that applicants are six in number belong to a different village and are tenure holders of Gata No. 62, while on the other hand land which is subject matter of grant of Pattas is Gata No. 66, which is recorded "banjar" in the revenue records and there are three gatas btween the land of petitioner and the land which was subject matter of allotment to the private respondents. 6. Apart from the above, the Additional District Magistrate also returned finding that the land has been allotted to the private respondents in accordance with law after following all the rules and regional Lekhpal has also stated that physical possession of the said land has been given to the allottees, and some of whom have even made houses on the said land. 7. The petitioner being aggrieved by order of the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) dated 02.11.2020, had preferred revision before the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Devi Patan Division, Gonda. The revisional Court also looked into all the contentions raised by the petitioner and the revisional Court had returned finding that Gata Nos. 66, 102 and 558 were subject matter of allotment by means of order dated 03.03.2015, in favour of private respondents. Further the Additional Commissioner considered the report submitted by the Tehsildar, Tehsil - Jamunha, District - Sharavasti dated 18.10.2019, according to which on Gata No. 66 some of the allottees have also been put into possession and have constructed houses. He further considered the fact that petitioner was in no manner whatsoever aggrieved by the allotment made in favour of private respondents and cannot be considered to be a person aggrieved by the said allotment. He further observed that the petitioner is no manner concerned either with the land which the subject matter of allotment or the allotment process itself, and accordingly did not find any ground for interference in the order of Additional District Magistrate dated 12.11.2020. 8. Before this Court petitioner has reiterated the arguments which were raised before the authorities below. He has levelled allegations with regard to eligibility of the respondents for being allotted patta and submitted that there exists report of Tehsildar dated 17.06.2017, which discloses that the private respondents are not entitled for grant of Patta and accordingly prays for setting aside the impugned orders and also the Patta granted to the private respondents. 9. The respondents on the other hand have supported the impugned orders and submitted that the petitioner has been only demonstrating that he has sufficient interest in the matter so as to maintain complaint for cancellation of Pattas. It was stated that the petitioner is stranger to the entire proceeding and he is not the person aggrieved. They further submit that even land of petitioner is not contiguous to the land which is subject matter of allotment of Pattas and accordingly pay for dismissal of writ petition. 10. Considering the rival submissions it is noticed that both the authorities have duly returned finding that petitioner is not a person aggrieved and at his behest application for cancellation of Pattas was not maintainable. 11. Considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 12. According to the petitioner she has purchased Gata No. 62, area 0.008 hectares situated in Village - Mohraniya, Pargana - Bahraich, Tehsil - Jamunha, District - Sharavasti by means of sale deed. The allegations made by the petitioner are with regard to allotment made by the State respondents over Gata No. 66, where 44 persons have been granted pattas. Both the parties below have held that the said land is not adjacent to the land of the petitioner and even otherwise there is no prayer that the petitioner himself was eligible for being granted any patta. 13. Accordingly, this Court finds that the petitioner does not have any substantial interest over the land in dispute. Apart from above, the petitioner is not even resident of the village on which pattas have been allotted. He is stranger to the entire proceedings. 14. The petitioner could not effectively rebut the aforesaid contention and accordingly this Court do not find any infirmity in the findings recorded by the revisional authority or by the Additional District Magistrate in granting patta, nor there was any interference in the enjoyment of the property of the petitioner which is situated over Gata No. 62. It is not the case of the petitioner that he was also claimant for grant of Patta and he has been illegally denied grant of the same. 15. Apart from the above, this Court finds that the petitioner is not even resident of the village in which pattas have been granted and consequently, we have no hesitation in holding that petitioner is stranger to the entire controversy. Hence no ground for interference in the matter is made out by the petitioner. 16. The writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench