HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10618 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no. 4. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the proceedings conducted under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, where petitioner has been held to be illegally encroaching upon Gaon Sabha land situated at Gata No. 712Ka, area 0.696 hectares, situated at Village - Oeal, Pargana - Kheri, Tehsil - Lakhimpur, District - Lakhimpur Kheri which is recorded as Pond in the revenue records. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that proceedings were initiated by the Tehsildar, Kheri where notices ere issued to the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner has appeared and filed her objections, subsequent to which she did not participated in the proceedings and same were concluded on 07.10.2023, where it was found that petitioner has infact encroached upon Gata No. 712Ka, area 0.003 hectares and she is being directed to be vacated from the said land and penalty of Rs.1,77,000/- has been imposed upon her. 4. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is poor widow and against order dated 07.10.2023, she had filed an appeal Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Kumar Gupta, Govind Kumar Chourasia Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey Smt. Renu .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) before the District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri, where the District Magistrate has also considered the aforesaid facts. The grounds taken by the petitioner that she was not afforded opportunity of hearing, which ground was not found to be correct inasmuch as from the perusal of the proceedings before the Tehsildar it was found that vakalatnama was filed on behalf of petitioner on 26.09.2017 and objections by the petitioner were also filed on 27.02.2018. With regard to merits of the controversy both the parties have relied upon the report of the revenue authorities where petitioner has been found to be encroaching upon the Gaon Sabha land by construction of Pakka house over Gata No. 712Ka, area 0.003 hectares which is described as Pond in the revenue records. 5. The petitioner on the other hand had merely stated that house of petitioner is constructed on Abadi and had categorically stated before the authorities and also before this Court that no encroachment is existing over the said land, which is described as Pond in the revenue records. Lastly, it is submitted that imposition of penalty of Rs.1,77,000/- is excessive and despite specific pleadings having been made in this regard, there is no manner of calculation of penalty and merely due to village rivalry, enhanced amount of penalty has been imposed. 6. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition. He has submitted that law with regard to encroachment on the Pond has been clearly stated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamla Devi and Others, 2001(6) SCC 496, and the aspect of encroachment has been clearly brought forth in the report of revenue authorities where the petitioner has constructed pakka house over the Pond land and therefore, prays for dismissal of writ petition. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. It is noticed that before either of the authorities below or before this Court, no specific explanation, documents or material is forthcoming with regard to ownership, right, interest or title over the land on which the petitioner is alleged to have constructed house. Entire proceedings are conducted on the basis of report of revenue authorities where it has bee clearly stated that house of petitioner has been constructed on the Pond WRIC No. 10618 of 2025 2 land situated at Kata No. 712Ka, area 0.696 hectares, situated at Village - Oeal, Pargana - Kheri, Tehsil - Lakhimpur, District - Lakhimpur Kheri. 9. Finding of fact recorded by the revenue authorities seems to be correct and even otherwise, this Court do not find any material on record to take contrary view then what has been recorded by the Tehsildar as well as District Magistrate. 10. Apart from the above, this Court is of the considered view that no individual has right to encroach upon the public land unless same has been allotted in his/her favour in accordance with law. Accordingly, this Court do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders. 11. However, considering the arguments of the petitioner that petitioner has not occupied Pond land, then authorities are directed to demarcate the land of petitioner before taking any proceedings to comply with the orders of eviction. 12. It is only when it is found that petitioner has occupied any portion of Gata No. 712Ka, which is described as Pond, only then, any coercive action shall be taken against petitioner. 13. This Court further finds that imposition of penalty of Rs.1,77,000/- on the petitioner is highly excessive. From the order of Tehsildar there is no material which could show that he has considered the fact of length of illegal occupation over the Pond land by the petitioner and methodology of calculation has been given in the said order, accordingly, it is in the aforesaid circumstances and in the facts of the case,penalty amount is reduced to Rs.25,000/-. Accordingly, in the impugned orders penalty of Rs.25,000/- shall be read in place of Rs.1,77,000/-. 14. In the light of above, present writ petition is disposed of. November 21, 2025 A. Verma WRIC No. 10618 of 2025 3 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench