Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47715 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7765 of 2025 Petitioner :- Saidaban @ Sardavan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Kumar Shukla,Mohit Singh,Shivam Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Rahul Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 and Sri Pankaj Gupta for Gaon Sabha - respondent No.4. 2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 7.7.2025 passed by District Magistrate, Bahraich in case No.696/2025, under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code thereby upholding the order of Tehsildar, Tehsil- Nanpara dated 30.11.2010 wherein the petitioner was declared to have illegally encroached upon gata No.1323/1831 area 0.003 hectare situated in Village Allapurva, Lakshmanpur Matehi, Pargana and Tehsil Nanpara, District Bahraich which is registered as public way (Rasta). 3. It has been submitted that a notice was received in the year 2010 alleging that the petitioner has encroached upon gaon sabha land. The said proceedings were initiated on the basis of the report submitted by Area Lekhpal and despite notice the petitioner did not participate in the said proceedings and accordingly ex-parte order was passed on 30.11.2010 against the petitioner. 4. Against the order dated 30.11.2010 the petitioner filed an application for recall on 3.2.2011 which was rejected on 27.5.2011. Against the rejection of the recall application the petitioner filed second application for recall on 10.3.2015 which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 7.9.2024 by which the Assistant Collector/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Nanpara has held that the second recall application would not maintainable in the same order. He has also taken note of the fresh report submitted by the revenue team on 12.8.2024 where it was found that that chak marg has been found to be vacant and it is free from any illegal occupation. It has been submitted that merely because the application was rejected on technical ground of maintainability, the Assistant Collector did not proceed to decide the case on merits despite the fact that the report was submitted by revenue team. Against the order dated 7.9.2024 the petitioner had preferred a revision which has also been rejected on 7.7.2025 upholding the order dated 30.11.2010. 5. A perusal of the aforesaid facts clearly indicate that it is by means of order dated 30.11.2010 passed by Tehsildar, Tehsil Nanpara that the proceedings under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act were filed agaisnt the petitioner which were ex- pare. Even subsequently recall applications were rejected and even the revision preferred by the petitioner has been rejected. 6. Without delving further into the controversy it is clear that the petitioner has not been heard at any stage and the merits of the objections have not been considered. Apart from the above, we find that while rejecting the application for recall Tehsildar, Nanpara has taken into account the report of the revenue team dated 12.8.2024 according to which there is no illegal occupation over gata No.1323 which is registered as Rasta and accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that in the entire proceedings the petitioner has not been heard while, on the other hand, according to the petitioner there is prima facie material which indicates that the petitioner is not in illegal occupation subject to verification of the said facts by the competent authority. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the case of the petitioner cannot be defeated merely on technical grounds, especially looking into the fact that the proceedings relate to illegal occupation where the house of the petitioner is liable to be demolished. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that opportunity should be given to the petitioner to place his case before the competent authority before the State respondents proceed to demolish the alleged construction. 7. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 30.11.2010, 7.9.2024 and 7.7.2025 are set aside. 8. The matter is remitted back to the Tehsildar, Tehsil Nanpara for determination afresh and the petitioner submits that all the facts necessary for adjudication are already on record which were filed by the petitioner along with application for recall. In any view of the matter, the petitioner will be at liberty to file all the documents which he wants under Section 122 B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act within two Weeks from today. The Tehsildar shall conclude the proceedings within a period of six weeks thereafter in accordance with law. 9. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the proceedings and shall appear on all the dates fixed in the case. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 14.8.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench