HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11434 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Tushar Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4. 2. In the present case, proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were initiated against the petitioner for illegal occupation over the Gaon Sabha land being Gata No. 455, area 0.053 hectares, situated in Village - Jagannathpur, Tehsil - Mankapur, District - Gonda which is recorded as Naveen Parti in the revenue records. 3. It has been alleged that of the aforesaid land an area of 0.002 hectares has been encorached by the petitioner on which he has made a residential house. Despite notices having been issued to the petitioner, he did not participate in the proceedings and accordingly, orders for his eviction and imposition of penalty were passed against the petitioner by means of order dated 09.05.2025. Thereafter, petitioner filed an application for recall of the said order, which application is pending consideration before the concerned authority. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, petitioner has filed present writ petition seeking direction to the State respondents not to take any coercive action against him till disposal of his recall application. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Prakash Singh, Vivek Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Kali Prasad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition. He has submitted that in the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the Tehsildar (Judicial), notices were duly served upon the petitioner but he deliberately did not participated in the said proceedings, instead of filing an appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, petitioner has filed recall application. 6. Accordingly, once petitioner has filed an application for recall, same ought to be considered and decided in case same is maintainable. 7. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, Tehsildar (Judicial), Tehsil - Mankapur, District - Gonda is directed to consider the application for recall preferred by the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law expeditiously, say within four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Tehsildar shall also consider and decide the issue of maintainability of the recall application. 8. With aforesaid directions, present writ petitioner stands disposed of. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not interfered in the orders passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. December 5, 2025 A. Verma WRIC No. 11434 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench