HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9230 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Shri Dileep Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 and 2 and Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. 2. The grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition pertains to proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, where the petitioner has legally encroached upon Gata No. 437 M. area 0.0060 hect., situated at Village Bangawan, Pargana Budhapayar, Tehsil Mankapur, District Gonda in proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code before the Tehsildar, which is recorded as 'Banjar' in the revenue record. The petitioner did not put in appearance or file objections and accordingly by means of order dated 2.12.2022 orders for eviction and imposition of penalty was passed. Subsequently the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the District Magistrate, Devi Patan, which has also been rejected. In the appeal the petitioner did not put in appearance and therefore only on the basis of material available on record, the same has been decided. The appellate Court has taken into account the fact that the petitioner has claimed benefit of Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code but it seems that his case has not been considered. 3. It has further been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the mother of the petitioner was granted a patta on Gata No. 437 M., area 0.002 hect. and it is the same land on which the petitioner is in possession. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dileep Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Ram Kishore .....Petitioner(s) Collector, Gonda And Others .....Respondent(s) 4. Accordingly, considering the judgement of High Court in the case the petitioner claims benefit of Section 67-A of the U.P. Revenue Code the Authority will have to consider his claim along with notice issued under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code. Therefore the claim of the petitioner under Section 67-A of the U.P. Revenue Code has to be duly considered before imposition of penalty order can be passed. Only in this regard that the interference is being made by this Court in the present case. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to move an application under Section 67-A of the U.P. Revenue Code before the appropriate Authority, within next three weeks. The Competent Authority shall proceed to pass a speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks thereafter. 6. In case the petitioner prefers an application under Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code and till such time an appropriate order is passed by the Competent Authority on application under Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner with regard to the order dated 30.8.2025 passed by the District Magistrate as well as the order dated 4.7.2024, passed by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Mankapur, District Godna and in case the application under Section 67-A of the U.P. Revenue Code is allowed then the petitioner will be at liberty to move an appropriate application for setting aside the orders passed in proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code and while in case his application is rejected, the respondents would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law and enforce the order passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code. I also grant liberty to the petitioner to assail the order in the present case, in case his application under Section 67-A of the U.P. Revenue Code is rejected. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. September 26, 2025 Muk WRIC No. 9230 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench