HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10324 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. 1. 'Vakalatnama' filed by Ms. Atiya Abid, Advocate on behalf of one Mukesh Kumar is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers: "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus" commanding the respondents, not to disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner from their holding of their plots in any manner till the re-survey under government order dated 02-03-1995 is completed. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus" commanding the respondents to respect the judgment dated 17-05-2016 in earlier Writ Petition No. 6214 of 2002 (M/B), which was filed by the Petitioner so therefore under the judgment dated 17-05-2016 passed by this. Hon'ble Court the petitioner is protected from dispossession. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of "Mandamus" directing the respondents to complete the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dilip Kumar Pandey, Krishna Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ramesh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) survey/record operation of Village Dadlaha, Tehsil Safipur, District Unnao under the notification dated 02-03-1995 of erstwhile U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, which is now stands. repealed by the new Act i.e. U.P. Revenue Code." 4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that this is second writ petition filed by the petitioner and for the same cause of action, previous writ petition was filed by the petitioner bearing Writ Petition No.6214(M/B) 2002, which was disposed of vide order dated 17.05.2016 after recording the fact that the respondents had denied the fact that the petitioner was sought to be dispossessed. 5. It is further noticed that even if the averments made in the writ petition are correct, then according to the petitioner, there is a dispute pertaining to the location of the land of the petitioner situated at Gata No.804 of Village Dadlaha, Pargana Fatehpur Chaurasi, Tehsil Safipur, District Unnao. Even it is in the aforesaid circumstances, if the dispute pertains to the location of the plot, the petitioner has adequate remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act where the petitioner has liberty of filing objection at various stages including Section 9 and 20 of the Act and therefore, no interference is required to be shown by this Court in this case. 6. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. November 6, 2025 Anupam S/- WRIC No. 10324 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench