Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 190460 (ALL)

BALJOR v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AMBEDKAR NAGAR AND OTHERS

WRIC/9309/2025 · 2025-10-07

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9309 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents no. 1 to 3 and Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4. 2. By means of present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the orders for demolition dated 5.6.2025 and 13.06.2025, passed by Assistant Collector, First/ Tehsildar, Tehsil- Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar and 28.08.2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar with regard to Gata No. 407 Kha area 0.030 hectares, situated at Village - Bhasma, Pargana Surhurpur, Tahsil Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, wherein the petitioner is alleged to have encroached upon the Gaon Sabha land, which is recorded as 'pasture land' in the revenue records. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that notice under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was served upon the petitioner who filed no objections and subsequently, relying upon the report of the concerned Lekhpal, it was held that petitioner has encroached upon the Gaon Sabha land of Gata No. 407 Kha area 0.030 hectares, situated at Village - Bhasma, Pargana Surhurpur, Tahsil Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, and accordingly orders for eviction and imposition of penalty were passed against petitioner. 4. In the objections filed by the petitioner in response to the notice issued under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the petitioner has only stated that he has not encroached upon the Gaon Sabha land, but, does not disclose the land which is owned and possessed by him which may be in the vicinity of the disputed land belonging to Gaon Sabha. 5. Assailing the order dated 5.6.2025 and 13.6.2025, before the appellate authority for the first time the petitioner stated that he was owner and in possession of Gata No. 400 Kha of the aforesaid village, but it seems that Gata No. 400 Kha is also not adjacent to Gata No. 407 Kha. 6. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has stated that Gata No. 400 Kha if not adjacent to Gata No. 407 Kha. Repeating the aforesaid arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that perusal of Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Umesh Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Baljor .....Petitioner(s) District Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar And Others .....Respondent(s) village map would indicate that both the Gatas are adjacent to each other and dispute is only with regard to demarcation. Petitioner again maintained the stand that has has not encroached upon Gata No. 407 Kha. 7. Accordingly, considering the aforesaid arguments it is provided that on the application made by the petitioner under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, respondent no. 1- District Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar shall direct the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned to conduct proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, forthwith and conclude the same expeditiously, say within two months from the date of order passed by respondent no. 2. 8. In the proceedings before the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, he shall determine whether petitioner has encroached upon Gata No. 407 Kha. In case, it is found that petitioner has encroached upon Gata No. 407 Kha, then the authorities shall proceed to ensure compliance of orders dated 5.6.2025 and 13.6.2025 and 28.8.2025, under Sections 67 and 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. But on the other hand, in case it is found that petitioner has not encroached upon Gata No. 407 Kha, it shall be open for the petitioner to move recall application before the competent authority. In case any such application is made by the petitioner, the authority concerned shall pass appropriate orders expeditiously, without giving effect to the impugned orders passed under Sections 67 and 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 9. With above directions, present writ petition stands disposed of. October 7, 2025 Muk WRIC No. 9309 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench