SMT. BASANTA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 11 OTHERS
WRIC/9346/2025 · 2025-09-24
Brij Raj Singh, Sangeeta Chandra
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 166385 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 166385 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9346 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.
HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-
"[I] issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties no.4 to 6 etc. to complete the process of resolving problem of demarcation of the land of petitioner in pursuance of the direction/letter dated 4.6.2025 passed/issued by the opp. party no.3 constituting the Committee for resolving the problem as contained in ANNEXURE NO.1 to this writ petition. [II] issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opp. party no.4 to 6 etc. to take necessary legal action against the opposite parties no.8 to 12 as per law and also comply the provisions of section 22 and 23 of U.P. Revenue Code."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that an application for demarcation was preferred by the petitioner for Gata no.3587/0.3667 hectare, where a final order was passed in her favour. One Leela Devi had challenged the order dated 4.10.2023 before the Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda. Such challenge was rejected on 8.11.2023. The petitioner filed a mutation application and got her name recorded in the Khatauni/revenue records. The Revenue Inspector and other revenue officials demarcated the plot of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Shekhar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Smt. Basanta .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 11 Others .....Respondent(s)
petitioner and now, respondent nos.7 to 12 have illegally broken the pillars fixed by the authority concerned. Hence, this writ petition has been filed. 4. The petitioner has a remedy under Section 227 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the Tehsildar. 5.
This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to move an application under Section 227 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a period of two weeks from today and if such an application is moved, the Tehsildar concerned shall ascertain the correct facts after hearing respondent nos.7 to 12 also and then pass an appropriate order within a period of three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order along with the application is placed before him. September 24, 2025 Sachin WRIC No. 9346 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench