HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32693 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard Sri Vishnu Gupta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1 to 4 and Sri Punit Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no.5. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the following relief:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus prohibiting/restraining the respondents from demolishing and dispossessing the petitioner from Khasra No.3509/2 агеа 0-14-0 Bigha situated at Mohalla Charshiri, City & District Bijnor. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no.1 to 4 to correct their revenue records in compliance of the judgment and decree dated 25.11.1993 in Reference No.171 of 1993 (Abdul Wahid Khan Vs. U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board) and judgment and decree dated 19.09.2015 passed in Original Suit No.661 of 2013, passed by learned Civil Judge (SD), Bijnor. iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.5 to amend its Waqf Register in compliance of the judgment and decree dated 25.11.1993 in Reference No.171 of 1993 (Abdul Wahid Khan Vs. U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board) and judgment and decree dated 19.09.2015 passed in Original Suit No.661 of 2013, passed by learned Civil Judge (SD), Bijnor and the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Punit Kumar Gupta Gaus Mohammad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) judgment and order dated 24.07.2023, passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ-C No.21636 of 2023 (Gaus Mohammad Vs. U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board). iv. Issue, any other writ, order or direction, in favour of the petitioner, as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the present facts and circumstances of the case, so as to secure the ends of justice or else, the petitioner shall suffer irreparably. v. Award the cost in favour of petitioner." 3. It is submitted that petitioner is the owner of Gata No.3509/2 агеа 0-14- 0 Bigha situated at Mohalla Charshiri, City & District Bijnor. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent no.3 is threatening him to demolish the structure standing on the aforesaid land. According to petitioner, earlier there was a dispute between petitioner and respondent no.5, and the petitioner approached the Waqf Tribunal by filing Reference Case No.171 of 1993 in which compromise has been entered into between the petitioner and respondent no.5. 4. Thereafter, the respondent no.5 continued to interfere with the possession of petitioner, and petitioner instituted Original Suit No.661 of 2013 praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession of petitioner against the U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board (respondent no.5 in the present petition). 5. The aforesaid suit was decreed by the Trial Court by judgement and decree dated 19.09.2015. On the strength of aforesaid cases, petitioner claims that he has already been declared owner of the land in dispute, and respondent no.3 cannot interfere with the possession of petitioner and demolish the construction raised over the said land without adopting due procedure of law. 6. Be that as it may, in the instant case, the land which the petitioner claims to be the owner is recorded as 'abadi' and name of petitioner has not been mutated in the revenue records. The question as to whether since when the petitioner is in possession over the suit property, and whether the property has been vested with the petitioner under Section 9 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 are the questions of fact which cannot be determined by this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as for determination of said questions, assessment of evidence is required. WRIC No. 32693 of 2025 2 7. Further, we have perused the writ petition and find that pleading with regard to threat given by respondent no.3 is vague inasmuch as petitioner has not averred in the writ petition as to on what date and what time respondent no.3 had visited the place of petitioner and threatened him. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited the attention of the Court to paragraph no.31 of the writ petition stating that the necessary averment has been made in paragraph no.31 of the writ petition. For convenience, paragraph no.31 of the writ petition is being reproduced herein below:- "31. That it is relevant to mention here that over the petitioner's land he is running a sawmill in the name of the petitioner and suddenly, the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Bijnor Shri Nitin Kumar came alongwith Tehsil officials and warned the petitioner that he is illegally encroached upon the property of the waqf and running the sawmill, therefore, the petitioner should immediately vacate the waqf property." 9. The averments in paragraph no.31 of the writ petition with regard to the fact that respondent no.3 has threatened the petitioner is vague as it does not indicate on what date and at what time respondent no.3 had visited the place of petitioner and threatened him. 10. Since the dispute involved in the present petition requires adjudication of disputed question of fact, therefore, we do not find any good ground to grant the relief as prayed for by the petitioner in the present writ petition. 11. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy available under the law. October 15, 2025 Sattyarth WRIC No. 32693 of 2025 3 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad