MOHD. AKBAL KHAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 6 OTHERS
WRIC/9348/2025 · 2025-09-24
Brij Raj Singh, Sangeeta Chandra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 166428 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 166428 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9348 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 respondents concerned not to stop the construction raising by the petitionerover the land Gata No. 401/0.0690 hect. situated at Village -Jaganpur, Tehsil-Sohawal, Pargana-Magalsi, District- Ayodhya. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondents concernednot to create any hindrance in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the Gata No.401/0.0690 hect. situated at Village - Jaganpur, Tehsil- Sohawal, Pargana-Magalsi, District-Ayodhya. III. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUScommanding the authority concerned to take appropriate action against the opposite party no. 3 to 5 for the deliberately and intentionally disobedience of the order dated 14.02.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in WRIC No.1468 of 2025."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier police Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vindeshwri Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mohd. Akbal Khan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s)
authorities were interfering in the construction of the petitioner and the petitioner filed Writ-C No.1468 of 2025, which was disposed of, by this Court on 14.2.2025 with a direction to the respondents not to interfere in the construction of the petitioner in case there is no temporary injunction in favour of private respondents in the pending suit, and the police may only interfere when there is only problem of law and order and breach of peace. In compliance of such an order passed by this Court, the petitioner moved an application before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya, who instituted an enquiry regarding the allegation of police interfering in the construction of the petitioner and the enquiry report was submitted by the Sub-Inspector, Police Station Raunahi, District Ayodhya on 17.3.2025 before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has a civil dispute relating to the said land with the private respondents and Civil Suit no.45 of 2023 is pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Haweli, Ayodhya/Faizabad. 4.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that even after dismissal of the suit for non-prosecution, respondents are still interfering in the construction of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has placed before this Court the instructions sent by the Sub-Inspector, Police Station Raunahi, Ayodhya, wherein it has been stated that the police authorities are not interfering in any manner with the constructions of the petitioner. The said instructions are kept on record. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of. September 24, 2025 Sachin WRIC No. 9348 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench