Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18031-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8504 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mohd. Umar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amitesh Pratap Singh,Naveen Kumar Singh,Neetu Bhardwaj,Shesh Ram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kamlesh Singh,Manjusha Kapil Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the State and Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Kamlesh Singh, learned counsel for opposite parties no. 4 and 5. 2. After hearing parties' counsel what comes out is that the petitioner and opposite parties no. 4 and 5 were granted residential patta/lease in respect of the land measuring 0.013 hectare forming part of Gata No. 241 situated at Village Gonda, Pargana Bhitauli, Tehsil Ramnagar, District Barabanki. The petitioner herein alleging interference by the opposite parties no. 4 and 5 in his possession filed a suit for permanent injunction which is pending and the Commissioner's report has been filed therein. As of now, there is no temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner. During pendency of the suit, the opposite parties no. 4 and 5 moved an application before the Sub Divisional Magistrate stating that the petitioner herein had taken possession in excess of the land given to him on lease, therefore, the Sub Divisional Magistrate constituted a revenue team on 03.08.2024 which demarcated the patta land of both the parties and found that the petitioner was in possession of excess land, accordingly, the excess land which should have been in the possession of opposite parties no. 4 and 5 in pursuance to the patta granted to them, has been handed over to the private opposite parties. The instructions received by Mr. Manish Misra, learned standing state that the petitioner is in possession of the land which was leased out to him measuring 0.013 hectare. 3. In view of the aforesaid, this is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but, this is without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the petitioner in the pending suit, meaning thereby, the suit may be decided uninfluenced by any observations made hereinabove. The petitioner may avail the remedies aforesaid. 4. The writ petition is disposed of. [Om Prakash Shukla, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.] Order Date :- 1.4.2025 Santosh/- Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench