HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11944 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. Heard Sri Ram Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Govind Kumar Chaurasiya holding brief of Sri Mohan Singh for respondent No.2. 1. The oral request to permit the petitioner to implead Sub Divisional Magistrate, Milkipur, Ayodhya as a respondent in the memo of the petition is allowed. He is permitted to carry out the same during course of the day. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that proceedings under Section 67 of U. P. Revenue Code were initiated against the petitioner with the allegations that he has encroached upon gata No.304 whose total area is 0.658 hectare out of which the petitioner has encroached upon 0.011 hectare situated at Village Rautawan, Pargana Khandasa, Tehsil Milkipur, District Ayodhya, which is recorded as Talab. 3. It is before the Tehsildar that the petitioner had appeared and filed his objections that he has not encroached upon the gaon sabha land and submitted that he is occupying only on gata No.303 which is 4. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Nath Pandey, Om Prakash Srivastav, Pushkar Dixit, Rahul Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ashutosh Dhar Dubey, Mohan Singh Chandra Bhan Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Ayodhya And Another .....Respondent(s) abadi land. The Tehsildar relied upon the report of the revenue official wherein it was recorded that the petitioner had encroached upon the gaon sabha land and accordingly rejected his objections and directed eviction of the petitioner and also for imposition of penalty by means of his order dated 29.4.2024. The petitioner had challenged the order dated 29.4.2024 before the appellate authority where also the order of Tehsildar was affirmed and the appeal of the petitioner was rejected by means of order dated 26.8.2025. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that no demarcation has been carried out either prior to issuance of notice under Section 67 or any time thereafter which can determine that the petitioner has encroached upon the gata No.304 which is recorded as Talab i.e. pond. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case demarcation proceedings are carried out it will establish that the petitioner has not encroached upon the gaon sabha land. Accordingly, prayer was made that demarcation proceedings be undertaken and in case in those proceedings it is established that the petitioner has encroached upon any portion of the pond land situated at gata No.304 then the respondents may proceed with the order under Section 67 and in case it is found that the petitioner has not encroached upon the gaon sabha land then the impugned order may not be given effect to. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents do not oppose the innocuous prayer made by the petitioner 8. In light of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with giving a direction Sub Divisional Magistrate, Milkipur, District Ayodhya to conduct the proceedings under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code within next two months in accordance with law. In case in those proceedings it is found that the petitioner has, in fact, encroached upon the gaon sabha land, situated at gata No.304 then 9. WRIC No. 11944 of 2025 2 they may proceed to execute the orders passed under Section 67 and in case it is found that the petitioner has not encroached then liberty is granted to the petitioner to move application for recall of order passed by Additional District Magistrate (Administration) who shall pass necessary orders taking into account the order under Section 24. December 11, 2025 RKM. WRIC No. 11944 of 2025 3 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench