HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8467 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Brij Bhushan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4. 2. Grievance raised by petitioner by means of present writ petition is with regard to proceedings conducted against petitioner in exercise of power under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner has been subjected to notice stating that he has illegally encroached upon the land being Gata No. 1067m, 0.427 hectares situated at Village - Babhaniyawan, Post - Khajurar, Thana - Payagpur, District - Bahraich. 3. The petitioner had appeared before the Tehsildar and denied the allegations, but did not filed any evidence justifying his occupation on the said land. The Tehsildar relied upon the inspection report submitted by regional Lekhpal and whose statement was also recorded before the Tehsildar and had stated that the petitioner had encroached upon the Gaon Sabha land which is recorded as "Rasta" and considering the aforesaid facts, Tehsildar passed orders for eviction and imposition of penalty upon the petitioner. 4. The petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 14.02.2023, preferred an appeal before the Chief Revenue Officer, Devi Patan Division, Bahraich. Before the appellate authority the petitioner has assailed validity of order passed by the Tehsildar and also assailed the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 wherein he had sated that his house is existing adjacent to the road and it is not constructed on the road itself and accordingly had challenged the order of Tehsildar. 5. Even in the appeal the petitioner had not annexed any document pertaining to his right and interest on the land on which the house was constructed by him, but merely stated that encroachment was not on any Gaon Sabha land. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Brij Bhushan Singh, Pranjal Apurva, Sandeep Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Amar Singh .....Petitioner(s) Addl. Commissioner, Tehsil Prayagpur Division, Devipatan Mandal, Gonda And Others .....Respondent(s) 6. Further the appeal was filed belatedly, and the appellate Court despite delay rejected the appeal on merits of the case. He has recorded finding that no infirmity can be found in the order of Tehsildar and apart from which there was no material on record to take a different view then what has been held by the Tehsildar. 7. Before this Court, arguments raised before the revenue authorities have been reiterated in the proceedings either before the Tehsildar or before the appellate authority i.e. Chief Revenue Officer, no document has been filed by the petitioner, indicating his rights over the disputed property. Though, before Tehsildar, petitioner has stated that no constructions has been made by him, but in appeal itself he has stated that construction does not exist on the road which is described as "Rasta" in the revenue records. The petitioner has not disclosed his right, title or interest on the land on which constructions has been made, which is admitted by him. On the other hand this Court finds that the revenue authorities have consistently held that the petitioner has encroached upon the Gaon Sabha land situated at Gata No. 1067m, which is recorded as "Rasta". 8. Accordingly, for the aforesaid reasons, this Court do not find any ground for interference in the impugned orders passed by the Tehsildar or by the appellate authority. Both the authorities have duly considered the grounds raised by the petitioner and they also could not find any ground for passing order in favour of petitioner. 9. In the light of above, present writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. September 4, 2025 A. Verma WRIC No. 8467 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench