Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70002-DB Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6349 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Nitya Const Company Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dipendra Kumar,Pradeep Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Srivastava Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Prayer in the writ petition is for quashing the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by respondent no.3. This order states that the petitioner had been given possession over a piece of land containing some constructions, which has been misused by the petitioner by covering an area which is a park. 3. On previous occasion, learned counsel appearing for the respondents had been granted time to produce documents to justify that only an area of 577 square mtr., mentioned in the impugned order, had been given to the petitioner. Nothing of substance could be produced by learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Therefore, the extent of the possession granted to the petitioner is not established by the material of record. Even the agreement between the parties, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-2 to the petition, ostensibly grants a lease for five years to the petitioner but the said document has not been registered, though prima facie requires registration. Moreover, this document does not mention the area of the plot over which possession was granted to the petitioner. 5. Under the circumstances, since the claim of the petitioner necessarily involves disputed questions of fact, we see no justification to interfere in the matter as the dispute is beyond the scope of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to seek such remedy as available under the common law for redressal of his grievance. Order Date :- 2.5.2025/Asha Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad