HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 12647 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 & 7 and Sri Prathamesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7. 2. Pursuant to order of this Court dated 25.04.2025, learned Standing Counsel has produced instruction dated 02.05.2025, which is taken on record. 3. Based upon instruction, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that it is a private dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 5. He next submitted that by sale deed dated 28.02.2002 executed by wife of petitioner in favour of respondent No. 5, he became owner of plot in question i.e. Plot No. 1068, but due to illegal occupancy of petitioner upon the said plot, respondent No. 5 could not take the possession of the same. He next submitted that plot in question was rented to one Pawan Kumar Agrawal, who was using it as a storeroom. He next submitted that respondent No. 5 approached the state authorities for redressal of his grievance. Acting upon the application of respondent No. 5, police authorities only to maintain the law and order visited the plot in question on 28.02.2025 and the plot in question was peacefully vacated by Pawan Kumar Agrawal and no demolition took place on the plot in question by any administrative authority. 4. He next submitted that earlier, wife of petitioner had also filed Writ C Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amish Kumar Srivastava, Jeetendra Kesharwani Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Prathamesh Upadhyay Abdul Hasan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) No. 7006 of 2025 for the very same plot in dispute, which was dismissed vide order dated 10.03.2025. Against the order dated 10.03.2025, SLP(Civil) No. 9313 of 2025 was also filed before the Apex Court, which was decided vide order dated 03.04.2025 with the observation for no interference with the impugned order passed by the High Court and direction to consider expediting the hearing of Suit No. 774 of 2023. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner opposed the submission of learned Standing Counsel and submitted that wife of petitioner approached the Court for an adjacent plot No. 1067. 6. Be that as it may, now it is clear that it is a private dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 5 and also one Pawan Kumar Agrawal, therefore, remedy available to the petitioner is to file a suit. 7. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed with liberty to file suit, if so advised. October 15, 2025 ADY WRIC No. 12647 of 2025 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMAR DEEP YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad