Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80896 Court No. - 49 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 630 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jai Sankar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J. Parties have exchanged affidavits. Admit. Heard forthwith. Heard Ms. Jigyasa Sinha, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Navin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ray, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State. This writ petition has been filed in public interest with a prayer that a mandamus be issued, ordering respondent nos. 2 to 4 to restrain respondent no.6 from securing the illegal possession of a pond bearing Arazi No.1007M, situate in Village Kyokhar, Tehsil Gyanpur, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi). The old Gata number, as it appears, of Plot No.1007M was 1351/1 admeasuring 1-10-15. This plot has been renumbered during the consolidation operations as Plot No.1007M, a fact evident from perusal of CH Form 41, annexed as Annexure-1 to the Collector's personal affidavit. The petitioner sought this direction to prevent encroachment of Plot No.1007M, because he thought that this was a recorded pond in the revenue records, which it was in the current records, to wit, 1425 to 1430 fasli. The Collector, has, however pointed out that this entry of a pond shown in Gata No.1007M of which the old number was Gata No.1351/1, was a mistaken entry and, in fact, this plot was originally recorded as usar. The Collector's stand is evident from a perusal of Paragraph No. 5 of his personal affidavit which reads :- "5. That it is submitted that in the CH Form 41 and 45, Gata No. 1007-(M) area 1- 10-15dhur is recorded as usar (barren/unfit for cultivation), the old Gata No. of the said plot was Gata No. 1351/1 (M). As per the Khasra of Fasli Year 1320, preserved in the District Record Room, Bhadohi, Gata No. 1351 is recorded under theusar category. Furthermore, in the Khatauni of Fasli Year 1358, also preserved in the district archive, Gata No. 1351/1, area 1-17-15dhuris recorded as usar. Similar entries also appear in the Khataunis of Fasli Years 1357, 1358 and 1366 to 1368, which confirms that the said land has consistently been recorded as usar. Copy of CH Form 41 and 45, Khasra of Fasli Year 1320, Khataunis of Fasli Years, 1358 and 1366 to 1368 are being filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE NO. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 to this affidavit." We have been taken through the khasra for the fasli year 1320 and khatauni for the fasli year 1358 and the six yearly khatauni from 1366 to 1368. In each of these old documents Plot no.1351/1 is recorded as usar; not pond. The Court has also been taken through some old P11 entries pertaining to the pre-zamindari abolition days where Plot No.1351/1 is shown recorded in the khata of usar. In PA form 11 for the fasli years 1336-1368 also Plot No.1351/1 is shown as usar. After the assignment of a new number during consolidation, it does appear that this plot of land has been mistakenly recorded as a pond leading the petitioner institute the present proceedings for preventing encroachment of this invaluable public utility land. Now that it is clear that Plot No.1351/1 or Plot No.1007M (the new number) is not in fact a pond, but mistakenly entered as a pond in place of usar on 28.3.2006 due to erroneous orders of a Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gyanpur dated 12.10.2004 and 28.3.2006 mentioned in paragrap-7 of the Collector's personal affidavit, the cause of action here stands effaced. We do not think that the petitioner would have any grievance now. Paragraph No.8 of the affidavit clearly indicates that the erroneous entry of usar as a pond has been corrected vide order dated 25.3.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gyanpur. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there would be some pond in the village, which is encroached and old records be called forth from the Collector to ascertain facts in order that a direction be given to the Collector to restore these life-giving ponds back to the village community. We think that the aforesaid direction may well be beyond the purview of the present PIL, which had a very definitive office, and that was to prevent encroachment in Plot No.1007M believed to be a recorded pond. That having been shown to be the result of an error in the revenue records, we do not think that any further orders are required to be made in this petition. The petition is, accordingly, consigned to records with liberty to the petitioner to bring a fresh petition, if he so desires, in order to restore old village ponds. In this case, the original records that were received from the District Magistrate, Bhadohi. These shall be returned to Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ray, learned Standing Counsel for their onward and safe transmission back to the Collector, Bhadohi. The records are secured by a cloth cover duly sealed. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 Shiv Digitally signed by :- SHIV KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad