HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8184 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Rajendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4. 2. By means of present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the orders dated 11.1.2017 and 2.8.2024 passed by Tehsildar/Assistant Collector, Tehsil - Sadar, District - Raebareli and order dated 25.6.2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Raebareli with regard to Gata No. 252 area 0.031 hectares, situated at Village - Kishnupur Ramchandra, Pargana and Tehsil- Sadar, District - Raebareli, wherein the petitioner is alleged to have encroached upon the Gaon Sabha land, which is recorded as 'Mela Revadi Ram Talab' in the revenue records. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Area Lekhpal got prepared R.C. Prapatra 19 against the petitioner stated in that the petitioner has encroached gata No.252 area 0.006 hectare situated at Village Kishunpur Ramchand Pargana Sadar, District Raebareli. 4. That on the basis of R.C. Prapatra 19 Lekhpal submitted report dated 25.11.2016 and relying upon the report dated 25.11.2016 under Section 122 B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act was instituted against the petitioner and penalty of Rs.2,16,000/- was imposed ex-parte against which the petitioner filed the restoration application and the same was decided by Tehsildar on 2.8.2024 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajendra Singh Chauhan, Vineet Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey Mata Prasad Maurya .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) stating that Petamber son of Heeralal filed the restoration application although the restoration application was filed by the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the order dated 2.8.201 petitioner filed appeal under Section 67 (b) of U.P. Revenue Code before opposite party No.2 and specifically stated that he has not encroached upon gata No.252. 5. The petitioner also moved an application dated 25.6.2025 before opposite party No.2 prying for a fresh demarcation report to be prepared in presence of the petitioner but opposite party No.2 without considering he said application rejected the appeal and passed the order dated 25.6.2025 in an illegal and arbitrary manner. 6. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has stated that Gata No.252 is adjacent to Gata No. 253. Repeating the aforesaid arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that perusal of village map would indicate that both the Gatas are adjacent to each other and dispute is only with regard to demarcation. Petitioner again maintained the stand that he has not encroached upon Gata No. 252. 7. Accordingly, considering the aforesaid arguments and considering the contentions of the petitioner that he has not encroached upon gata No.252, it is provided that on the application to be made by the petitioner under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before respondent no. 2 - District Magistrate, Raebareli who shall direct the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned to conduct proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, forthwith and conclude the same expeditiously, say within two months from the date of order passed by respondent no. 2. 8. In the proceedings before the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, he shall determine whether petitioner has encroached upon Gata No. 252. 9. In case, application under Section 24 is moved by the petitioner, no coercive action shall be taken against him in compliance of the orders passed under Sections 67 and 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code till the application of the petitioner under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code is decided. 10. In case, it is found that petitioner has encroached upon Gata No.252, WRIC No. 8184 of 2025 2 then the authorities shall proceed to ensure compliance of orders impugned in the present writ petition, under Sections 67 and 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. But on the other hand, in case it is found that petitioner has not encroached upon Gata No.252, it shall be open for the petitioner to move recall application before the competent authority. In case any such application is made by the petitioner, the authority concerned shall pass appropriate orders expeditiously, without giving effect to the impugned orders passed under Sections 67 and 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 11. With above directions, present writ petition stands disposed of. September 3, 2025 RKM. WRIC No. 8184 of 2025 3 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench