Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2655 (ALL)

SIBBU RAM v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

WPIL/3935/2025 · 2026-05-14

Arun Kumar

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3935 of 2025 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Mannu Ram Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri B. K. Tripathi, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha. 2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief: "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. no. 2, 3 & 4 to remove the encroachment from the Navin Parti over Khasra/Gatta No. 268 ख, Rakaba 1.2460 Hectare situated near Harizan Basti at Goan Sabha Chhittampur, Pargana- Badawal, Tehsil-Sakaldeeha, District- Chandauli, made by the respondent no. 6 & 7, by a reasoned and speaking order within a specific period which is to be fixed by this Hon'ble court." 3. In pursuance of the direction of this Court, the instruction dated 28.01.2026, sent by the Deputy District Magistrate, Sakaldeeha, Chandauli, has been placed before the Court by learned Standing Counsel, which is taken on record. 4. Perusal of the aforesaid instruction shows that plot no.268/2 area 0.166 hectare is recorded as bhumidhari land of Angad, Awadhesh and Jaswant. Plot no.268Kha area 1.246 hectare is recorded as Naveen Parti, over which an old Abadi is existing. According to the instruction, it is evident that respondent nos.6 and 7 have not encroached upon any portion of plot Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mannu Ram Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C. Sibbu Ram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) no.268Kha. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent nos.6 and 7 are the owner of plot no.270 adjacent to plot no.268. They have raised construction encroaching upon plot no.268Kha. 6. The apprehension of the petitioner that by raising construction over their plot no.270, the respondent nos.6 and 7 have encroached upon adjacent plot no.268, is not substantiated in view of the instruction sent by the concerned Deputy District Magistrate, as such, the present PIL for evicting them from plot no.268 appears to be misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. May 15, 2026 Ashok Kr. WPIL No. 3935 of 2025 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad