HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11172 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Mahesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner as well as Sri Yogesh Kr. Awasthi, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the notice dated 12.07.2025 issued to the petitioner pertaining to his illegal occupation of Gata No. 741 area 0.030 hect. situated at Village Ram Nagar, Pargana - Bharosa, Tehsil Baldirai, District Sultanpur. 3. It has been submtied that name of the ancestors of the petitioner are existing in the revenue record and also that a suit for declaration being Civil Judge No. 1301 of 2025 (Ram Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) has already been filed by the petitioner in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sultanpur. 4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that all the facts and grouds in his defence can be placed before the competent authority who is proceedings against the petitioner U/S 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and apart from which it is stated that there is no defect in the notice issued to the petitioner and none has been pointed out by him. 5. Considering the rival contention, it is noticed that petitioner has been put under a notice in proceedings U/S 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 by Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mahesh Chandra Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Ram Chandra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Chairman, Board Of Revenue U.P., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) the Tehsildar, Tehsil Baldirai, District Sultanpur by means of notice dated 12.07.2025. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner has further submitted that petitioner has already filed his objections before the Tehsildar and a copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure No. 10 to this petition. 7. Considering the fact that petitioner has already appeared in the proceedings U/S 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 by filing his objections then the same cannot be considered simultaneously in proceedings under Artilce 226/227 of Constitution of India. 8. Accordingly, for the said reasons, present writ petition would not be maintainable, the writ petition is dismissed and the petitioner is at liberty to pursue his remedy pursuant to the notice issued U/S 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before respondent No. 5 who shall proceed to consider and decide the case in accordance with law expeditiously. November 20, 2025 Ravi/ WRIC No. 11172 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench